The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the importance of consistent testimonies, and the need for independent witnesses to support the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT :

V.G. BISHT, J.

1. This Appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25th November, 1999 passed in Sessions Case No. 451 of 1997 by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302, 324, 147, 148 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).

2. At the outset it may be noted that in said Sessions Case No. 451 of 1997 there were ten accused. All of them came to be acquitted vide impugned judgment and order which is subject matter of the present Appeal. However, this Court (Coram: J.A. PATIL & P. V. KAKADE, JJ.) was pleased to admit the Appeal as against original accused (Balu Bhagu Vashivle-(A-1)-respondent No.1 and rejected as against rest of the respondents-accused.

3. Narrated in nutshell, the prosecution case is that;

(a) The informant’s father, namely, Mahipat Ramchandra Vashivle (“deceased” for short) at the relevant time was sarpanch of village Barpe, Tiskari and also a worker of Congress Party. An agricultural land bearing Gat No. 172 of village mouje Barpe is being cultivated by informant’s uncle, namely, Bhagu Santu Vashivale (A-2) and his cousin, namely, Balu Bhagu Vashivale (A-1). The deceased was the tenant of the said land of which the original owner is Ashok Dayaram Gujar. Because of this, a tenancy proceeding started between the informant’s family and said A-1 and A-2. A-1 and A-2 always used to quarrel with informant and the deceased and had expressed their intention of not relinquishing their rights over the said agricultural land. In the election of Panchayat Samiti A-1 and A-2 quarreled and fighted with informant and deceased on the ground of informant giving support to a Congress candidate.

(b) On 10/06/1997 while informant and deceased were travelling in a ST Bus, informant’s cousin, namely, accused Ganpat Khandu Vashivle quarreled and while alighting from the bus at village Barpe again abused and rushed on informant’s person with a knife. At that time, the deceased intervened and separated the quarrel.

(c) According to prosecution on 11/06/1997 at about 6-00 a.m. informant’s cousin, namely, Vishnu Appa Vashivale (PW-3) visited the informant’s house and informed that accused Ganpat Khandu Vashivle and Khandu Kondiba Vashivle had gone to Poud police station in order to lodge the complaint in respect of incident of previous night and while proceeding to the police station they asked accused Balu Bhagu Vashivle (A-1), Bhika Pandu Vashivle, Bhagu Santu Vashivle, Ashok Pandurang Vashivle to kill you.

(d) Prosecution then alleges that at about 7-00 a.m. of 11/06/1997 accused Manisha Ganpat Vashivle, wife of Ganpat Khandu Vashivale, came in front of the house of informant and started abusing informant and the deceased. The deceased tried to persuade her and asked her to go to her house. Even the deceased held Manisha Ganpat Vashivale by her hand and dragged her to a certain distance. While the deceased was returning, all of a sudden, prosecution alleges, accused Bhagu Santu Vashivale (A-2), Balu Bhagu Vashivale (A-1), Bhika Pandurang Vashivle, Ashok Pandurang Vashivle, Tarabai Balu Vashivle, Tanabai Bhagu Vashivle and Chhaba Rai Walanj came running armed with stones and sticks towards the deceased and started beating him. As the informant and his brother Bharat Mahipati Vashivle (PW-1) intervened in order to save the deceased, both of them were beaten by means of stones and sticks, as a result of which Bharat Mahipati Vashivle sustained injuries on his head. The deceased sustained serious injuries on his head and abdomen and was, therefore, rushed to hospital where doctor declared him dead.

4. The informant, therefore, approached Lonavla Police Station and narrated the incident. Accordingly, PW 10-PSI Devanand Gulabrao Yadav attached to Lonavla Police Station reduced into writing vide Exh. 62. However, as the offence had taken place in the village Tiskari within the jurisdiction of Paud Police Station, said PSI registere