Advocates:
['RP JOSHI', 'SM DUBEWAR', 'AV MADADHE', 'APP']

1

J-1Cri.Appeal-51-2012.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.51 OF 2012

APPELLANT

:

Siddharth S/o Shankar Singade,

Aged about 30 years, Occupation :

Driver, R/o Ashtabhuja Ward, Near

Buddha Vihar, Chandrapur.

--VERSUS--

RESPONDENT :

The State of Maharashtra,

Through Police Station Ofcer, Police

Station Ramnagar, Chandrapur,

District-Chandrapur.

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

Shri. R. P. Joshi, Advocate for appellant

Ms. S. Haider, APP for respondent/State.

CORAM

: N. B. SURYAWANSHI, J.

RESERVED ON

: 24/06/2021

PRONOUNCED ON

: 26/07/2021

JUDGMENT

The appellant, by this appeal takes exception to the

judgment and order passed by the learned Extra Joint Adhoc

Additional Sessions Judge Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.39

of 2010, by which the appellant is convicted under Section

307 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to sufer

rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fne of

Rs.1,000/-, in default to sufer rigorous imprisonment for six

2

J-1Cri.Appeal-51-2012.odt

months.

2.

In short, the prosecution case, is that :

The informant Dhiraj Bansod was residing with his

parents and elder brother Sonu at Ashtabhuja Ward,

Chandrapur. The accused Siddharth Singade was also

residing alongwith his wife and children in front of the house

of the informant. Nilu Shende resident of Mohada was the

sister-in-law (wife’s sister) of the accused and she used to

come to the house of the accused as a guest. Sonu was in

love with her and they wanted to marry. Sonu’s parents and

brother Dhiraj did not want Sonu to marry Nilu. On

01.10.2009 at 10.00 pm in the night, Dhiraj was giving

understanding to Sonu in front of his house that he should

not be involved with Nilu as she would not cooperate with

him. When they were talking, accused Siddharth came

running from his house and gave beating to Dhiraj. He

pushed Dhiraj towards the drainage and took out a knife

from the back side pocket of his pant and inficted knife

blows on the chest and stomach of Dhiraj. Dhiraj was taken

to General Hospital, Chandrapur. The Medical Ofcer

informed the Police Authorities. Assistant Police Inspector of

3

J-1Cri.Appeal-51-2012.odt

Ram Nagar Police Station came to the Hospital and recorded

statement of Dhiraj. Accordingly, he registered F.I.R. at

Crime No.366 of 2009 for an ofence punishable under

Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He arrested the

accused and seized the weapon from him. He Conducted

spot Panchanama and seized the plain earth and earth

mixed with blood. He forwarded the clothes of the injured

and the accused, so also the dagger stained with blood

recovered from the accused to Chemical Analyzer. He

submitted charge sheet after completing the investigation.

3.

The accused was charged under Section 307 of

the Indian Penal Code. He denied the charge. His defence

was that on the day of incident, there was quarrel amongst

Dhiraj, Sonu and their father. During that quarrel, Sonu

brought dagger from the house and inficted blows of

dagger on Dhiraj. He was falsely implicated as he did not

reach Nilu to her father’s house on the say of informant

Dhiraj. With a view to save Sonu, the informant has made

false allegations against the appellant. The trial Court, after

recording the evidence, convicted the appellant, hence the

present appeal.

4

J-1Cri.Appeal-51-2012.odt

4.

Heard the learned Advocate for appellant and the

learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

5.

The learned Advocate for the appellant submitted

that there are material discrepancies in the evidence of the

prosecution witnesses. The prosecution has failed to prove

the charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code

against the appellant. Though the dagger was allegedly

recovered from the appellant, the recove