The appellant inflicted three blows on the head of the deceased with a large knife Sura Article No.13 and deceased fell down.
646/2004 and the State preferred Criminal Appeal No.828/2004 against acquittal of accused No.8 Babasaheb Maruti Shirsath before the High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad.
Further, it was stated that on 30.07.2002, when he was opening the shop, the deceased, PW 10 and PW 11 came in front of the shop and asked him to companye out.
In his opinion, the death was caused on account of shock due to the injuries on the head and on the brain of the deceased.
Police arrived at the scene of occurrence the victims were taken to the nearby hospital.
The appellant herein took up the defence that the parties were on inimical terms since he had filed Civil Suit No.
The appellant had sustained CLW on occipital region 2X1X1 cms and an abrasion on forearm 3X1/4 cm.
The appellant made a companyfessional statement and produced a large knife sura article number13 companycealed in a pit on the bund of the field of Ramkisan Shinde, which is near the scene of occurrence.
291/2001 before Taluka Court for an order of injunction and possession and the companyrt had ordered status quo.
At about 4 PM, on that date when the deceased came in front of the appellants shop, the appellant abused the deceased.
Reference was also made to the evidence of PW 12 Dr. Kulkarni, the autopsy surgeon, who had stated that injury Nos.
Criminal Appeal No.
646/2004, this appeal has been preferred by the first accused, Arjun.
646/2004 and companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence passed by the trial companyrt against the appellant.
Accused No.8 had sustained incised wound on the abdomen from which the intestines were protruding with omentum.
Again, when PW 10 Karbhari brother in law of PW 8 and his son Ambadas PW 11 came to their rescue the appellant assaulted both of them.
127/2002 was registered under Sections 147, 148, 302, 326, 324 r w Section 149 IPC and investigation was entrusted to P.I. Randive PW 14 .
In the village Taklimanur, there was an annual fair on 30.07.2002.
Hence, he had to flee but they chased him.
828/2004 preferred by the State against acquittal of accused No.8 was also dismissed by the High Court vide judgment dated 24.11.2006.
Due to the injuries, the deceased died on the spot.
PW 1 inflicted a blow with Gupti on the stomach of accused No.8 near a Pipal tree and the other accused companytinued to assault him.
The Sessions Court tried the case registered against some of the prosecution witnesses and they were companyvicted for offences punishable under Section 307 r w Section 149, Section 324 r w Section 149, Section 147, Section 148, and Section 149 IPC for five years with fine.
The plea of private defence, as stated by the learned companynsel, is number available to the appellant.
PW 1 and PW 8 had clearly stated that it was the appellant who had first inflicted three blows on the head of the deceased by a knife which was the cause of death of Jaganath.
They were armed with weapons.
When PW 8 Muktabai intervened to rescue her husband, the appellant inflicted blows on her head, back and shoulder.
The appellant was in the army service and after retirement, about 5 to 6 years prior to the incident on 30.07.2002, he started a stationery shop at Taklimanur situated adjacent to the subject matter of the suit.
1, 2 and 5 were caused by hard and sharp weapon such as Sura article number 13, injury number 3 was caused by hard and blunt weapon and injury Nos.
He also stated that pressure was also exerted on him to withdraw the civil suit.
The appellant was armed with a large knife, accused No.3 was armed with an axe and others were carrying sticks.
PW 1, by that time, also joined his father.
The High Court vide its judgment dated 24.11.2006 dismissed Criminal Appeal No.
Later, all the accused were arrested by 04.08.2002.
The prosecution story, in a nutshell, is as follows The deceased Jagannath and Muktabai PW 8 parents of Rangnath PW 1 , his brothers Ashok Gahininath and Rajendra were all living together at Taklimanur, Taluka Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.
In that melee, the appellant and accused number 8 were also injured and they were taken to the nearby hospital.
Based on that report, Crime No.
PW 1, son of the deceased, lodged a report of the incident with Pathardi Police Station at about 8.30PM on the date of the incident.
PW 1 had also inflicted injury on the stomach of accused No.2 with a Gupti.
291/2001 before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pathardi.
Aggrieved by the judgment in Criminal Appeal No.
Later, when the deceased, his wife Muktabai and son Rangnath were going to Ambikanagar for worship of the Goddess, the appellant, his brothers Babasaheb accused No.8 , Buvasaheb accused No.2 , Suresh son of Buvasaheb accused No.7 , Dnyandeo accused No.4 , Bhimrao accused No.5 , Patilba accued No.3 , Ramnath accused No.6 attacked the deceased on the road near Tamarind tree.
Fearing that he would be killed, he snatched iron rod from the hands of Gahininath and waived iron rod in the air.
There were some property disputes between the first accused appellant and the deceased Jagannath for which the appellant had filed Civil Suit being RCS No.
Sensing some trouble, he accosted accused No.8, who was at the market.
7, 8 and 9 were caused by hard and rough surface.
The appellant had also lodged an FIR on 30.07.2002 at 8.50 P.M. against the companyplainant Rangnath, Karbhari PW 10 , Ambadas PW 11 and other persons.
Aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence, the appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No.
S. Radhakrishnan, J. The appellant, herein, was companyvicted by the 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for short IPC for murder of one Jagannath Rambhau Shirsath and for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous hurt to Muktabai, wife of deceased Jagannath.
