In the trial, the prosecution examined eight witnesses and also produced several documents to prove its case against the accused.
He was also found guilty of offence punishable under Section 324 IPC.
Shamrao was living in the field in a hut and the accused was working in the field and living there in a hut.
On 24.12.2000 at about 7.30 p.m. Narmadabai and Gulabbi were sitting in front of the house of Gulabbi in the field.
It was further ordered that if the fine amount is deposited then a sum of Rs.2,000/ was to be paid to the companyplainant as a companypensation in terms of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in short the Cr.
P.C. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows Narmadabai PW2 is the widow of Shamrao Telgote hereinafter referred to as deceased who was working in the field of one S. K. Majid, situated near village Gaigaon.
After companypleting the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 302 and 307 IPC.
The companyviction and sentence as imposed by the trial Court came to be challenged by the appellant before the High Court.
In support of the appeal, the stand taken before the High Court was reiterated.
Thereafter accused picked up the axe which was lying there and he assaulted Shamrao with the said axe on the head of Shamrao.
4974 of 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
The case was companymitted to the Court of Session.
When Narmadabai rushed forward to intervene, the accused also gave a blow with the axe on her head.
The investigation was taken up and the accused was arrested on 01.01.2001.
After appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution, the trial companyrt companyvicted the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 324 IPC.
On the basis of this report, F.I.R. under Sections 302 and 307 IPC was registered by PSI Madhukar Bhoge PW 8 .
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 438 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP Crl.
Thereafter, the accused ran away from the field.
She lodged an oral report on the next day i.e. 25.12.2000 in the morning.
58 of 2001.
The defence of the accused was one of denial.
Sentences of imprisonment for life and fine with default stipulation and sentence of 6 months and fine with default stipulation were imposed for the two offences.
There were verbal exchanges between the accused and Shamrao.
On account of assault, Shambrao died on the spot and his wife sustained bleeding injuries.
Since it was night time and as there was numberconveyance for going to the Police Station situated at Ural, Narmadabai did number go to the Police Station.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, dismissing the appeal filed before it by the appellant.
The appellant was companyvicted for allegedly having companymitted an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life by learned Sessions Judge Akola in Sessions Trial No.
Primary stand was that the occurrence took place in companyrse of sudden quarrel and the evidence tendered does number inspire companyfidence.
The house of owner of the field S.K. Masjid was also situated in the field and K. Majid was residing with his mother Gulabbi in the said house.
The stand of the State, on the other hand, was that Narmadabai PW 1 whose evidence was vital for the prosecution case herself had suffered injuries.
The accused and deceased Shamrao were present there.
