Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Vishnu Sahai, J.
Chintaman Rajaram Kharkar and others.... Appellants.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra.... Respondent.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 157 162 of 1988, decided on 29-7-1994.
Advocates appeared :
S.P. Kotwal h/f S.R. Chitnis, for appellants in C.A. No. 157 of 1988.
D.S. Savani, for the appellants C.A. No. 162 of 1988.
Ms. S.J. Pingelkar, A.P.P., for the State.
See Indian Penal Code, l860-Sections 147, 149 and 324.
Sections 147, 149 and 324-Evidence Act, 1982, Sections 60 and 61F. I. R.-Evidence in court-Infirmities and inconsistency between-Whether accepted?
Held, the informant in his F. I. R. alleges that all the accused persons (appellants) were armed with knives but in the trial Court seeing that there were injuries of weapons other than knives also he modulated his aforesaid averment in the F. I. R. in terms that the appellant K had a dagger in his hand, deceased-accused G bad a knife in his hand, appellant T had a knife in his hand, appellant A had a iron rod with him and appellant Chintaman had a knife in his hand.
Definitely, the aforesaid modulation by him in his version impairs his veracity his statement is belied by medical evidence in as much as he says that appellant G assaulted him with a knife on abdomen but a perusal of his injuries which have been reproduced in the earlier part of judgment, shows that he sustained no injury attributable to knife on his abdomen. This witness is wholly silent on the question of injuries being caused to deceased-accused G. A-3 mentioned earlier that he was named as accrued In the F. I. R. with respect t~ the same incident which Was lodged in respect of murder of deceased-accused G. Admittedly, there was enmity between him and the appellant C. On account of the aforesaid reasons, it would not be safe to accept his testimony.
So far as V PW 2 Cs real brother is concerned his evidence is hardly any better. He also says that the deceased-accused G assaulted C with II knife on abdomen. He also does not explain the injuries sustained by the deceased-accused G. He does not depose about the participation of appellants C and T in the incident. On account of the aforesaid 3 reasons coupled with the fact that he is the real before of C PW I, it would not be safe to accept his testimony.
2. All the six appellants in both the connected criminal appeals were convicted under sections 147 I.P.C., 452 and 324 I.P.C. read with section 149 I.P.C. and were sentenced to undergo 4 months, 6 months and 8 months rigorous imprisonment respectively. In addition, appellants Chintaman Rajaram Kharkar, Trimbak Shimgya Mokashi, Ashok Harishchandra Mokashi and Kiran Trimbak Mokashi were convicted under section 142 I.P.C. and were sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences of the appellants were directed to run concurrently. The aforesaid convictions and sentences of the appellants were recorded by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 262/1986 vide order dated 4-2-1988.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant Chandrakant, P.W. 1 and Vitthal P.W. 2 are real brothers. They reside in Village Vitawa, Koliwada, Taluka and District Thane. The appellants are also said to be the residents of the same village. It is alleged that they had jointly purchased a video which had been stolen away and a complaint of theft had been lodged at Rabale Police Station. In pursuance of that complaint, P.W. 1 Chandrakant is said to have been arrested but later on acquitted. On this score, relations between the complainant and others on one side and the appellants on the other are said to be sour.
On 26-9-1985, at about 9.30 p.m. complainant Chandrakant P.W. 1 had gone to take darshan of Ganpati idol at the house of one Nandkumar Patil of his village. It is said that a large number of persons including the appellants and deceased-accused Girinath, had also assembled there. It is alleged that after darshan, when Chandrakant was about to leave the house, appellant Chintaman caught hold of him and asked him to return the video which be had stolen and threatened him that, in case, he did not do the same, he would be beaten. Later on an alteration on account of this challenge of Chintaman is alleged to have taken place between Chintaman and Chandrakant and it ultimately exploded into a scuffle. It is alleged that all the appellants rushed towards Chandrakant, who, on seeing them ran to his house, which was situated nearby. It is said that the appellants chased him inside his house. It is also stated that appellants Chintamani Trimbak and deceased-accused Girinath were armed with knives. Appellant Ashok had an iron rod and appellant Kiran had a dagger in his hand. The allegation is that the deceased-accused Girinath inflicted one knife blow an the abdomen of Chandrakant and another knife blow on his chest. It is said that, he made a third attempt to inflict a knife blow on Chandrakant but he warded of the same by raising his arms. The allegation is that the appellant Ashok gave a blow with iron rod on the right shoulder of Vitthal and appellant Vishvanath assaulted him by a stick on his head. One Suresh is also said to have received injuries in the incident. After assaulting Chandrakant and others, the appellants are said to have run away.
4. The First Information Report of this incident was lodged by Chandrakant P.W. 1 on 26-9-1985 at 11.45 p.m. at Police outpost, Kalwa which was attached to Rabale Police Station. The time of incident in the F.I.R. is mentioned as 10.30 p.m. the same day.
5. The injuries of the three victims, namely, Chandrakant, Vitthal and Suresh P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 respectively were medically examined on 27-9-1985 at Civil Hospital Thane, by Dr. Suresh Dadu Bhaite P.W. 5.
On the person of Chandrakant, the doctor found following injuries :---
1. Abrasion on left side of abdomen 2 x 2 cms.
2. Incised wound on left thigh 1 x ½ x ½ cms bleeding present.
3. Abrasion on right big toe 2 x 2 cms.
4. Incised wound on left side of chest wall (anterior) ½ x ½ x ½ cms. bleeding present.
5. Incised wound on left arm 2 x ½ x ½ cms.
On the persons of Vitthal, the doctor foun
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
