JUDGEMENT :- This is an appeal by an accused who has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Satara of an offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-.

2. The facts of the prosecution case are that, at the material time viz. on the 17th of December 1968, one Balvant Shingate who was an agriculturist by profession was working as the Talathi of a village named Sartale about 6 or 7 miles away from another village named Marde in Satara District. The said Balvant was a close friend of one Sitaram Shingate, the brother of the accused, and the accused as well as his brother Sitaram had their lands in the village of Marde. It appears that Balvant had a brother named Waman with whom he had certain property disputes, and the said Waman was a friend of the accused. This is the background of the relations between the parties. On the morning of the 17th of December 1968 Sitaram had gone to Balvant's house as Balvant needed Sitaram's cart for the removal of groundnut creepers from one part of his field to another part of the same field, and Balvant and Sitaram therefore started to go, Sitaram's house. On the way they were joined by one Shankar Patil who was formerly a revenue Patil. The three of them went together to Sitaram's house and had tea there, and Shankar and Balvant then left the house of Sitaram. Shanker being ahead by 10 or 12 paces. Whilst they were walking in that order and were only about 50 paces from Sitaram's house according to the prosecution, the accused Ramchandra came from the north side where his own field was situated, on to the road by which Balvant was proceeding. The prosecution case is that when he came in front of Balvant he took out a knife from the pocket of his pyjama trouser and gave a blow with that knife on the left side of Balvant's stomach that Balvant then shouted, whereupon the accused gave another blow on the right side of Balvant's stomach, that on hearing the shouts Sitaram rushed to the soot from his house and caught hold of his brother the accused and lifted him up and threw him on the ground, in which process Sitaram himself sustained a slight injury. The prosecution story is that the accused then tried to strike Sitaram on his back but missed the blow and the blade of the knife came in contact with the around and got bent. Sitaram then snatched the knife from the hand of the accused and gave it to his servant Maruti who had also come up by then, but the knife was ultimately taken possession of by the injured man Balvant who kept it in a cloth bag which he had with himself. Balvant was then put in a bullock cart and was given medical attention and fortunately recovered to tell the story in the trial court. On these facts, the accused was charged with the offence of having attempted to commit the murder of the said Balvant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and having caused injuries to the said Balvant in that process. The Sessions Judge accented the prosecution evidence and held that it was the accused who had inflicted the injuries in question on Balvant, but convicted him not of the offence under Section 307 the Indian Penal Code with which he had been charged but of the offence under Section 326 of the Penal Code and sentenced him as already stated above. It is from that order of conviction and sentence that the accused has preferred this appeal.

3. Three witnesses were examined in the trial court who, the prosecution alleged, were eye-witnesses to the incident, viz. the injured Balvant himself. Shankar Patil and the accused's brother Sitaram, the last named of whom was, however, allowed to be cross-examined as a hostile witness in the trial Court. Both Balvant and Shankar Patil have deposed to the prosecution story in much the same terms as those in which I have set the same out above and it is therefore, not necessary to repeat the same. No material discrepancies have been brought out as between the e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document