JUDGMENT :- The appellant - Rama alias Dhaktu Worak - appeals from a judgment of conviction upon a charge of murder under Section 302 of the I. P. C. The sentence passed is one of imprisonment for life. The said charge is that on or about 12th May 1968, at about 6.00 p. m. he intentionally or knowingly caused the death of Rama Mambo Worak, by assaulting him with a stick.

2. The prosecution case may be briefly stated: Rama Mambo Worak, the deceased, was a shepherd by occupation. On 12th May, 1968, as usual, he had taken a flock of sheep for grazing. The sheep returned to their fold barring three. Smt. Nagui Worak, wife of the deceased, asked her son Nahu Worak to trace them. Nahu Worak left his house for that purpose and, when he was near a tree, he saw the appellant calling the deceased. The deceased and the appellant spoke to each other. Nahu Worak heard them speaking but could not say what they spoke. Nahu Worak next saw the deceased returning in the direction of his home. It was then that the appellant called the deceased once again. When the deceased went near him, the appellant emerging from his home, gave a number of blows with a stick (tonko) on his head and other parts of his body. Nahu Worak then ran home and apprised his mother Nagui Worak of the assault by the appellant. She, Nahu Worak and her eldest son Thaku Worak ran towards the place of the assault, where they found the deceased lying unconscious and bleeding near this courtyard of the house of the appellant. The appellant on seeing them ran towards Cudchorem village. The complainant Mortu Worak, brother of the deceased, was apprised of the assault by the appellant, by Naku Worak, second son of the deceased and Balu, nephew of the deceased, at about 9.00 p. m. the same day. The complainant Mortu Worak at that time was in Cudchorem village in connection with a marriage. The complainant, along with Naku Worak and Balu Worak hastened to the scene of the assault. When they came there they saw the appellant, his mother, Nagui Worak, wife of the deceased, Laxman Gauncar, Babu Gauncar and some children. Nagui Worak was weeping. The deceased was found lying unconscious and he was bleeding. The complainant asked the appellant whether he had beaten the deceased. The appellant denied. According to him the deceased fell down near his house. The deceased later was carried home by Janu and Malu. The condition of the deceased became serious and therefore he was removed in a jeep first to Sanquelim hospital and later, to Asilo hospital at Mapuca on 13th May, 1968. The condition of the deceased being very serious he was not admitted in the Sanquelim Hospital. The deceased expired on 14th May, 1968. The complainant then lodged report with the police the same day at night time.

3. The appellant, when examined in the Court of Session, stated that the deceased fell down near his house when he found him unconscious and, at that time, no one was present. He called out for Naku Worak, son of the deceased, twice or thrice, but as there was no response, he went to Laksman Gaonkar and brought him. He denied assault on the deceased. He did not tell Laksman Gaonkar that the deceased abused and wanted to assault him. The complainant, according to him, was deposing against him because he had given a loan of Rs. 600/-to him which the complainant did not wish to return. He denied discovery of the stick (tonko) at his instance. He admitted that sometime back the deceased and he had quarrelled. He did not abscond. He added that the complainant gave him first blows when he denied assault on the deceased.

4. The prosecution evidence against the appellant is both direct and indirect I shall first consider the direct evidence. Nahu Worak (P. W. 2), the youngest son of the deceased, witnessed the assault at a distance of about 37.8 metres. This distance was later measured by Sub-Inspector Kale, at the instance of Nahu Worak, in the presence of panch witness Vishvanath Vishnum Fogueri (P. W. 7). Nahu Wor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document