JUDGMENT :

AMIT B. BORKAR, J.

Since both these appeals arise out of the same set of facts and common judgment, we are disposing them of by common judgment.

2. Through these two appeals, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 6/2017 challenges the judgment and order dated 15-12-2016 passed by the Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Case No. 9/2016, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter:-

(i) Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.

(ii) Under Section 506 of the IPC to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment.

3. The victim (wife of the deceased) has filed Criminal Appeal No. 142/2017, challenging acquittal of the accused Nos. 2 to 4 for offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.

4. Shortly stated the prosecution case runs as under:- The deceased Ramrao Rathod and the accused are resident of Village Jaipur, Taluka and Dist. Washim. The accused were being prosecuted in other criminal case on the information of deceased-Ramrao. On 6-10-2015, the accused with their juvenile son, in furtherance of their common intention, went to the house of deceased-Ramrao and asked him to settle the case. Deceased-Ramrao told them that after receipt of Court notice, he will withdraw the case against the accused but, on that the accused No. 1 assaulted Ramrao and gave blow with knife, which was carried by the accused No.1. The other accused also assaulted, abused and threatened to kill the accused No. 1. The deceased was seriously injured. He was taken to Government Hospital at Ansing and then to Washim but, he was not admitted there. His condition being serious, he was advised to be transferred to Akola Hospital and on the said advice his wife, informant, and others took him to local private hospital of Dr. Pande, where he was admitted and surgery was performed. Wife of the deceased, in the night, lodged report with Ansing police and the offence was registered. On the next day the statement of the deceased was recorded by the Police, while he was in hospital. Despite treatment and surgery, the deceased was not showing improvement therefore, doctor advised him to be shifted to Government Hospital, Yavatmal. The deceased was taken there but, in spite of treatment, he died.

5. Initially the offences were registered under Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504 and 506 of the IPC but, thereafter on the report of Dr. Pandey and based on investigation, the offences under Section 307 and 452 of the IPC where added. After the death of Ramrao, the offence under Section 307 of the IPC was altered to Section 302 of the IPC. The statement of witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer and the accused were arrested. On the basis of statement of the accused Nos. 1 and 2, weapons used in the crime were discovered. Police recorded statement of the accused and seizure panchnama was drawn in presence of panch-witness. Police also seized clothes of the accused and the deceased. Blood samples of the accused and the deceased were taken and sent to Chemical Analyst. Police also recorded inquest of dead body and got autopsy done to know the cause of death. After completion of the investigation, Police filed chargesheet it in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Washim. The case was thereafter committed to the Session Judge, Washim as the offence under Section 302 of the IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

6. Charges were framed against the accused, which were explained to them in vernacular, for which they pleaded not guilty. The defense of the accused was of denial.

7. The learned Trial Judge believed the evidence adduced by the prosecution and convicted the accused No. 1, in the manner stated in paragraph No. 2 above and acquitted rest of the accused. Hence both these appeals.

8. We h