IMPORTANT POINT
Ingredients of section 304 Part I, IPC applied.

JUDGMENT

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. These appeals are filed by the accused persons against the judgment and order dated 03.02.2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 215 and 225 of 2011 which arise out of judgment/order dated 11.04.2011 passed by the Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Sessions Trial No.80 of 2008.

2. Accused Nos. 5, 8, 9 & 10 have filed appeal @ SLP(Crl.) No. 8715 of 2014 whereas appeals @ SLP(Crl.) Nos.10109-10110/2014 are filed by accused Nos.1 and 4 and appeals @ SLP(Crl.) Nos. 9524-9525/2014 are filed by accused Nos. 2, 3 and 6.

3. By impugned judgment, the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentences awarded to the appellants by the learned trial Judge. Suffice it to state here that the appellants, apart from other offences were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further six months rigorous imprisonment. The sentences imposed in respect of other offences are of below 7 years and all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

4. The question, regard being had to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants, is whether the learned trial Judge as well as the High Court was justified in convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC considering the genesis of occurrence and the facts in entirety or they should have been convicted under Section 304 Part-I, IPC.

5. In order to appreciate the issue involved in these appeals, it is necessary to state the relevant facts in brief.

6. Apparao Rajaram Pund (A-1) and Madhavrao Rangnathrao Range (PW-3), both resident of village Itlapur in District Parbhani, were good friends. Both were agriculturists. Savitribai-the deceased was the wife of Madhavrao Range. Around 25-30 years back, Madhavarao had purchased two kathas of land from Apparao for his cattle shed in the same village and he was also placed in its possession. However, no sale deed was executed between them yet Madhavrao continued to remain in possession of cattle shed all through.

7. In course of time, both entered in politics and formed their respective panels to contest the elections for the post of Sarpanch of the village. In the election, panel led by Madhavrao Range won whereas panel led by Apparao Pund lost. Due to this event, the relations between them were not as cordial as they used to be in the past. Thereafter Apparao started pressurizing Madhavrao Range to vacate the land and hand over the possession of cattle shed else he was threatened to face the dire consequences.

8. On 15.01.2008, the appellants around 7.30 to 8.00 A.M. armed with weapons barged in the cattle shed and started removing the iron sheets fixed on the roof. Madhavrao requested the appellants not to remove the sheets. Since the appellants did not listen to Madhavrao and continued in their operation in removing the sheets, Madhavrao resisted and made attempt to stop them. At that time, Savitribai and Madhavrao's son -Udhav (PW -5), who were also present on the spot, intervened and resisted the appellants from removing the sheets. This led to scuffle between Apparao ( A-1), Sachin-( A-4), Achyut (A-3) and Madhavrao (PW-3). Accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 beat Madhavrao with fist blows and leg kicks and threw him out of cattle shed. Apparao(A-1), who was having bottle containing kerosene, poured the entire kerosene on cattle shed and Sachin ( A-4) set the cattle shed on fire. Savitribai, who was resisting the appellants, caught in contact of fire and received severe burn injuries. On noticing this, Madhavrao tried to enter in cattle shed to save his wife-Savitribai. Gopal (A-2) then inflicted an axe blow on Madhavrao’s head due to which he sustained bleeding injury. When Madhavrao cried for help, Navnath and other persons reached there and tried to extinguish the fire. Thereafter they wrappe