Judgment - R. C. CHAVAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal challenging conviction and resultant sentences inflicted on appellants for offences punishable under Sections 302, 506 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 2 ) FACTS which led to the prosecution of the three appellants are as under:- deceased Yeshwant was Uncle of the appellants. About 8 days before the 12th June, 1992, a bullock cart carrying coal belonging to Maruti, father of the appellants, had been seized by the forest department. Suspecting that yeshwant had informed the forest officials, Maruti started abusing Yeshwant and his family.

( 3 ) ON 12th June, 1992, at about 4. 00 p. m. , the victim's daughters, Surekha and Sujata, had gone to the river to fetch water. Sujata came weeping and informed her mother that her sister Surekha was beaten by Anita and another female member of Maruti's family. Victim Yeshwant proceeded towards the river on hearing this. Accused No. 1 Dattaram Maruti Sakpal armed with spear, accused No. 2 Rajaram and accused No. 3 Prakash, armed with axes with curved blades, chased the victim. Out of fear, victim Yeshwant entered the house of one Bhagi Katkari. Sunita sought to arm her husband Yeshwant with a spear, but the accused No. 1 snatched the same and gave it to his mother Laxmi. Accused No. 1 broke open the door of Bhagi Katkari's house. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 barged into the house from a window and three of them beat up the victim Yeshwant. They did not heed the victim's entreaties to let him go. Accused No. 2 Rajaram and accused No. 3 Prakash were pelting stones at the victim. When Sunita, victim's wife, went to her husband's rescue, she too sustained injuries. Yeshwant succumbed to his injuries on the spot itself.

( 4 ) SUNITA, wife of the victim, gave a written report to the Police Station, mahad, where an offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504 read with 34 of the Penal Code came to be registered. In course of investigation, the police performed inquest upon the dead body and sent the same for postmortem examination. They recorded statements of witnesses, arrested the accused persons, interrogated the accused and recovered a spear at the instance of the accused No. 1 Dattaram. Property seized was sent to the Forensic science Laboratory for analysis. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was sent to the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mahad. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions at Alibag, district - Raigad, on finding that an offence triable exclusively by the Court of sessions was made out.

( 5 ) THE learned Sessions Judge, Raigad-Alibag, charged the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 336, 452, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of IPC. The accused persons pleaded not guilty. They were put on trial. The actual trial was assigned to the Ilnd Additional Sessions Judge, raigad-Alibag. In course of the trial, the prosecution examined in all 14 witnesses. After examining the accused, and considering the arguments advanced, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellants of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 506 and 323 read with 34 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life, rigorous imprisonment for one year and rigorous imprisonment for one month, and fine' of rs. 2,000/-, Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 100/-, respectively. In default of payment of fine each of the accused was sentenced to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year, one month and seven days, respectively, on the three heads of the charges. The learned Sessions Judge proceeded to acquit the accused-appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 336, 452 and 504 of the Penal Code.

( 6 ) AGGRIEVED thereby the appellants have preferred the present appeal. We have heard both the learned Counsel for appellants and the learned APP at adequate length.

( 7 ) THE learned Counsel for appellants contended that the victim had left his house to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document