IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.580 OF 2008 State of Maharashtra, Police Station Babhulgaon. . . . APPELLANT ...V E R S U S..

1.Rajesh s/o Dattuji Kumbhekar, Aged about 20 years, 2. Dashrath s/o Dharma Debur, Aged 21 years, 3.Shrawan s/o Dharma Debur, Aged 19 years, 4.Ravi s/o Wasudeo Debur, Aged 19 years, 5.Raju s/o Dharma Debur, Aged 25 years, 6.Jitendra s/o Mahadeo Debur, Aged about 24 years, 7.Mahadev s/o Udebhan Debur, Aged about 50 years, 8.Vijay s/o Shankar Debur, Aged about 28 years, (As per Court’s Order dtd. 07/09/18 R.no.8 is deleted.)

9.Dharma s/o Suryabhan Debur, Aged about 54 years.

All resident of Yawali, Tq.

Babhulgaon, Distt. Yavatmal. . . . RESPONDENTS -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shri S.S.Doifode, A.P.P. , for the appellant/State.

Ms. Sonali Saware (Gadhawe), Advocate for the respondent nos.1 to 4.

Shri Sumit Joshi, Advocate for the respondent nos.5 to 7 and 9.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 26.11.2020.

JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :

1. Through this appeal, the appellant - State of Maharashtra, challenges the judgment and order passed by Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, in Sessions Case No.113 of 2006 dated 14.05.2008, thereby acquitting all the respondents of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 37 (1)

punishable under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under:-

F.I.R., dated 24.08.2006 filed by Informant - Mangala (PW 1), who is the wife of Mahadev (deceased), contends that her husband (deceased) was serving in M.S.R.T.C. Alongwith the informant, parents of the informant and her two brothers namely Dnyaneshwar and Bhayya were also residing. Brother-in-law of the informant is running pan-stall, which is managed by one Sunil. On

24.08.2006 at around 8.00 a.m. when the informant was in her house, the accused nos.1 to 6 went to the said pan-stall, which is situated in front of her house. Sunil was present at the pan-stall. The accused nos.1 to 6 purchased pouches of gutkha and when Sunil demanded the price of gutkha, accused nos.1 to 6 raised quarrel with Sunil. Therefore, one Jitendra filed report in Police Station in the name of Sunil.

3. At about 3.00 p.m. on 24.08.2006 Mahadev - husband of informant - Mangala (PW 1) returned to the house. When he came to know about the incident happened at about 8.00 a.m., he went to the place of the accused and asked why they raised quarrel with Sunil and then returned home. Thereafter at about 4.00 p.m. on 24.08.2006, all nine accused came in front of the house of the informant and asked Mahadev (deceased) and Bhayya as to why they had come to their house and abused. When Mahadev and Bhayya came outside the house, the accused abused and assaulted both of them using sticks. Accused no.2 - Dashrath assaulted Mahadev by using the sword on his head and killed him and also caused hurt to Bhayya.

4. The complainant - Mangala (PW 1) filed F.I.R., at 5.00 p.m. on 24.08.2006, which was registered as Crime No.125/2006 and the investigation started. On the same day, inquest, spot and seizure panchanamas of simple earth, earth containing blood were prepared and the dead body of Mahadev was referred to the Medical Officer Dr.Sute (PW 10) for carrying out post-mortem. The post-mortem report was prepared by Dr. Sute (PW 10), which was collected by the Investigating Officer Shri Fulpagar (PW 11). The Investigating Officer recorded statements of witnesses including eye-witnesses on 25.08.2006 and 26.08.2006. The Investigating Officer referred all the accused for medical examination and seized weapons alleged to have been used by the accused and also seized clothes of the accused alleged to have been worn by them at the time of offenc