JUDGMENT :

T. V. NALAWADE, J.

1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No.13 of 2012, which was pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nandurbar. The Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the Appellants for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 149, Section 307 read with 149 and Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Nos.1, 2 and 4 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code also. Original Accused No.5 (Katya Gavit) is acquitted by the Trial Court of all these offences.

2. Both the sides are heard.

3. In short, the facts leading to institution of the appeal can be stated as follows:

The informant, Surabai is widow of deceased Ruaji. This couple was living in a locality known as Uchalifali of Pratappur, Tahsil Nawapur, District Nandurbar. One of their daughters by name Mirabai is given in marriage to Sunil. Sunil is also resident of Pratappur. The house of Sunil is situated at a distance of more than 1 and 1/2 kilometers from the house of informant. The house of informant is situated in forest and agricultural land having threshing place is situated at a distance of around 1 and 1/2 kilometers from the residential place.

4. Accused No.1 (Hedya) is a cousin of deceased. Accused No.2 (Shankar) is real brother of Hedya. Partition of ancestral land had not taken place between the deceased and his brothers on one side and Accused Nos.1 and 2 on the other. Appellant No.3 is son of Hedya, Appellant No.4 is wife of Shankar, Appellant No.5 is wife of Hedya and Appellant No.6 (Dinabai) is also relative of other Appellants and she is wife of AccusedKatya, who is acquitted.

5. There was a litigation pending between these two sides as partition had not taken place. Tension between the two sides had increased as at the relevant time, there were fruit bearing trees of bare in the ancestral land, which was in the possession of deceased and the deceased was not allowing the Accused persons to take those fruits. Many quarrels had already taken place prior to the date of incident between the two sides.

6. The incident in question took place on 5th January, 2012. At about 06:30 pm, on that day, informant and deceased left home for the house of son-in-law Sunil with a tiffin for Sunil. When they were proceeding towards the residential place of Sunil through forest and they had crossed some distance from residential place, all the Accused intercepted them and assaulted them by using weapons like stone, axe and iron bar. Ruaji died on the spot and informant became unconscious. Accused persons felt that informant was also dead and so they left the spot.

7. After 2 to 3 hours of incident, Surabai regained consciousness and she somehow walked towards the place where Sunil was present. She narrated the incident to Sunil. Sunil and other relatives shifted the informant to Nawapur Government Hospital for treatment. In the Government hospital, police recorded her statement on 6th January, 2012 and Crime No.3 of 2012 came to be registered in Nawapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 read with 149 etc. of the Indian Penal Code.

8. During the course of investigation, spot Panchanama was prepared and dead body was referred for postmortem examination. Statements of witnesses came to be recorded. Articles taken over from the spot and blood samples of deceased and informant came to be sent to C.A. office. Chargesheet came to be filed for aforesaid offences. During trial, prosecution examined informant (Surabai). Postmortem report and injury certificates came to be proved. The Trial Court has believed the only eyewitness, who was available and examined by prosecution. In view of the absence of specific evidence as against Accused No.5, the Trial Court has acquitted him.

9. The prosecution has relied upon both direct and circumstantial evidence. Surabai (PW4) had sustained injuries in the incident. Her evidence shows that she is