The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on quality evidence, including eyewitness testimony, corroborative evidence, and forensic reports, to establish the guilt of the accused and modify the charges and sentences based on the nature of injuries and the intention of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

G.A. SANAP, J.

1. All the three appeals arise out of the Judgment and order dated 12/04/2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.98/2014. The Criminal Appeal No.449/2016 is filed by Pradeep @ Shetty Shriniwas Regundawar, who was accused No.1 in the said trial against the order of his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 34 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Criminal Appeal No.331/2016 is filed by Munna Sheikh Babbu Sheikh, who was accused No.2 against the order of his conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 34 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Criminal Appeal No.149/2016 is filed by accused No.3 Sagar s/o Pawan Bhasarkar and accused No.4 Satish s/o Banayya Tandra against the order of their conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Section 307, 34 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The sentences awarded to the accused are as follows:-

i] Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused No.1 - Pradeep @ Shetty s/o Shriniwas Regundwar is convicted and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for four months.

ii] Under Section 307, 34 r/w Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused No.1 - Pradeep @ Shetty s/o Shriniwas Regundwar is convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for four months.

iii] Under Section 307, 34 r/w Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused No.2 - Munna Sheikh s/o Babbu Sheikh, the accused No.3 - Sagar s/o Pawan Bhasarkar and the accused No.4 - Satish s/o Banayya Tandra are convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- each, and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for four months.

2. All the three appeals are being disposed of by common Judgment.

The facts are as follows :-

3. In the Judgment, the appellants would be referred by the nomenclature in the Sessions Trial as accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4. The incident occurred on 02/05/2014 at about 7.30 p.m. The informant Yaric Yafed Samial is the brother of the deceased. On the date of incident, there was marriage of the sister of one Ashok Chaple, R/o Rajendraprasad Ward, Ballarpur. The deceased and the injured witness PW-3 Vijaykumar Yellayya Komalla were present at the place of marriage at 2.00 p.m. The accused No.1 was also present in the marriage. At the time of lunch, one person in the marriage party insulted accused No.1 when he was taking lunch. He was asked to get up while taking the lunch. The accused No.1 hurled abuses to the said person. According to the prosecution, this was a trigger point for the commission of murder of the deceased. In the evening, there was marriage procession (Barat). The deceased and the PW-7 Deepak Ramesh Meghanwar were part of the marriage procession. It is stated that when the procession (Barat) reached near the marriage venue, the accused No.1 Pradeep and accused No.2 Munna started pushing the deceased and PW-7 Deepak. There was some dispute on account of this in the marriage procession (Barat). The deceased tried to persuade accused No.1 Pradeep and accused No.2 Munna not to indulge in such behaviour and avoid quarrel. At this point of time, accused No.1 instructed accused No.4 to bring the sticks from nearby Panthela. The accused No.4 brought the sticks. The accused No.3 also came to the spot with accused No.4. It is the further case of the prosecution that the