Back
2020 Supreme(Bom) 786
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
T.V. Nalawade, Mangesh S Patil, JJ.
Khandu - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2015, 172 of 2015; Criminal Application No. 1307 of 2020
Decided On : 21-08-2020
U.B. Bondar, Advocate, N.B. Khandare, Advocate, S.P. Deshmukh, Advocate, K.S. Patil, Advocate
The judgment establishes the principles of forming an unlawful assembly, common intention, and the use of direct and circumstantial evidence to determine guilt.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Murder - Section 302, Section 149 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute over land, leading to a fatal assault on the deceased and others by the accused. The trial court convicted all accused for murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused formed an unlawful assembly and had common intention to commit the murder. It held accused 1 and 2 responsible for the murder, while acquitting the remaining accused due to lack of evidence.
Issues: The key issues were the formation of an unlawful assembly, the specific roles of the accused, and the intention behind the assault.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence of direct and circumstantial nature, including medical reports, to establish the accused's common intention and their specific roles in the assault.
Final Decision: Accused 1 and 2 were convicted for murder, while the remaining accused were acquitted due to lack of evidence.
JUDGMENT
T.V. Nalawade , J. - Both the appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated 19/01/2016 passed in Sessions Case No. 18 of 2011, which was pending in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai, District Beed. The Trial Court has convicted all the six accused persons for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-. In-default of payment of fine amount, each of them is directed to undergo imprisonment of two months. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 have filed one appeal and accused No.6 has filed separate appeal. Both the sides are heard.
2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the appeals can be stated as follows:
All the accused persons and informant are residents of village Doka Tahsil Kaij District Beed. Deceased Raosaheb Bhange was father-in-law of informant Shivkanya (P.W. No.1). The deceased was distantly related on cousin side with one Subhash Jaywant Bhange. Subhash was father of accused Nos.1 & 2 (Laxman and Shashikant). There was dispute between deceased Raosaheb and Subhash over 40R portion of land survey No. 37/2 situated at village Doka. Due to the dispute, Raosaheb had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 148/2008 against Subhash and the relief of permanent injunction was claimed. Temporary injunction application, which was filed by Raosaheb by contending that he was in possession, was rejected by the Trial Court on 18th August 2009. Due to the dispute, the relations between families of Raosaheb and Subhash were strained. Accused No.6 Khandu Jivraj Bhange is said to be a friend of accused No.1 Laxman. Accused No.3 Rohini is wife of accused No.1 Laxman, accused No. 4 Usha is wife of accused No.2 and accused No.5 Sumanbai is widow of Subhash.
3. The incident in question took place on 17th June 2010. On that day, informant Shivkanya, the deceased, Mahaveer (husband of Shivkanya) and two lady labours employed by Mahaveer were doing agricultural operation like sowing Cotton seeds in some portion of land survey No. 7. This land is different land than the land which was involved in the litigation. The houses of accused persons are constructed in land survey No. 7 and there are many sharers in this land. At about 3.00 pm, Laxman, Shashikant, Usha, Rohini and Sumanbai came towards the place where the prosecution witnesses were busy in sowing operation. Accused No.6 Khandu Bhange was also in the company of accused Nos. 1 to 5 and there was one more unknown person with them, who was allegedly friend of accused No.6.
4. According to the case of prosecution, accused No.1 was holding an axe and accused Nos. 2 & 6 were holding sticks. The two lady members like Rohini and Sumanbai were carrying chilly powder. The two lady members threw chilly powder at the eyes of the prosecution witnesses and the deceased and all of a sudden male members of the side of the accused like accused Nos. 1, 2 & 6 started assaulting Raosaheb and Mahaveer with the weapons like axe and sticks. Due to the hue and cry of the prosecution witnesses, the persons, who were present in neighbouring fields like, Rajabhau Bhange, Khandu Sudarshan Bhange rushed to the spot of offence. As the persons started gathering, the accused persons went away.
5. Informant Shivkanya gave phone call to Babasaheb Bhange and requested him to arrange for conveyance as Raosaheb and Mahaveer were injured in incident and they were to be shifted to hospital. The injured were taken to the Government Hospital, Kaij, and from there, Raosaheb was shifted to Government Hospital, Ambajogai, for further treatment. Raosaheb succumbed to the injuries in Ambajogai Hospital on the day of incident. Shivkanya gave report to the police on 18th June 2010 and crime at C.R. No. 79/2010 came to be registered at 18.30 hours for the offence of murder of Raosaheb.
6. The post mortem was conducted on the dead body of Raosaheb on 18th June 2010 between
