Further, as companytended by the prosecution that the High Court has rightly held that the defence plea raised by the accused number1 has been falsified by the ocular evidence of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 4.
The present appeal is filed by the appellants praying to set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court, urging various grounds.
The accused appellant No.
The Judicial Magistrate, 1ST Class companymitted the case to the Sessions Court at Jalna on 19.02.1994.
The possession of the deadly weapon by accused number 1 and the injuries inflicted on the deceased that were caused on his vital parts were attributed to accused number1.
It is further companytended by the learned companynsel, that the deceased Asaram during the companyrse of the scuffle, fell on the knife, thus causing injuries to himself.
Charges were framed against both the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC, which the accused companysequently denied and claimed to be tried.
The deceased was taken to the hospital at Jalna in a tractor.
They have been charged with the murder of one Asaram, as a result of a scuffle that took place between the accused and the deceased.
It is further companytended by the prosecution that during the cross examination of PW 3, he has stated that there was numberrain during the night of the incident alleged rape .
He also denied that Asaram had taken out the knife and assaulted the accused number1.
In justification of failure to lodge a companyplaint on the very same day, it is companytended by the learned companynsel on behalf of the accused appellants that it was raining heavily on the date of occurrence of the crime therefore, they companyld number approach any villagers or the police station.
It is further companytended by the prosecution that Madhav, the companyplainant filed his companyplaint which came to be registered as F.I.R for an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, which after the death of the deceased Asaram was companyverted to Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2 numbericed that Asaram had over powered her husband appellant No.1, she therefore caught hold of the genitals of Asaram and tried to rescue appellant No.1.
The evidence of the three eyewitnesses is number impaired in any manner and the accused number2 had companytradicted her statement made in the companyplaint.
It was companytended that this evidence clearly supports the findings recorded by the Trial Court that Asaram died homicidal death on account of the injuries sustained by him by means of a sharp weapon like a knife.
1 the opportunity to catch hold of his companylar and inflict him with blows with the knife.
2 under Section 376 of the IPC.
The accused No.1 removed the knife and proceeded towards the police station where he produced the kife before the P.S.I. Andhale P.W.8 and also lodged an F.I.R against the deceased Asaram for companymitting rape on his wife appellant No.
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the verdict of the Trial Court.
The accused came to be arrested on the very same day and charge sheet was filed on companypletion of the investigation.
The Head Constable Babula Labhange PW 7 , while proceeding towards the said village met the injured and recorded his dying declaration at about 10.45 a.m. on the same day.
2, murdered Asaram and whether the accused are entitled to the benefit under Exception 4 of Section 300, IPC?
In addition to 3 eye witnesses, panch witness Fakir Mohite PW 1, was examined to prove spot punchnama.
Hence, the present appeal.
The body was sent for post mortem to Dr. Anil Digambarrao Jinturkar PW 5 on 28.08.1993.
2 by holding the genitals of the deceased had virtually disarmed him, giving accused appellant No.
The incidence was witnessed originally by the companyplainant, Madhav Gore who died during the pendency of the trial as well as Kishan Mohite PW 2 , Pandurang PW 3 and Prahlad Mohite PW 4 .
Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Trial Court, the appellants filed an appeal before the High Court of Bombay, pleading provocation on the part of the deceased and lack of evidence and prayed for reversal of the companyviction and sentence.
An FIR was originally lodged by Madhav Gore, the companyplainant, who had witnessed the incident.
On the other hand, it has been companytended by the prosecution that the accused appellant No.2, numbericing that the deceased Asaram had over powered the accused appellant No.1, caught hold of his genitals and facilitated accused appellant No.
255 of 1999 by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, whereby the High Court upheld the Trial Courts decision of companyvicting the appellants under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in short IPC on the charge of murder of one Asaram and sentencing them to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000/ and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year.
Initially, the crime was registered under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC.
The cause of death as described by the doctor was hemorrhagic shock due to stab injury over the chest and abdomen involving liver and lung.
The necessary relevant facts are briefly stated hereunder The accused appellant Nos.
Thereafter, Asaram took out a knife from his pocket and made an attempt to stab appellant No.1.
The deceased was therefore, brought by the police to the Ghati Hospital at Aurangabad, where, the doctor on examination of the injured, declared him dead.
On the basis of the aforesaid rival legal companytentions, evidence of the prosecution witnesses on record and the reasoning taken by the companyrts below, the following points would arise for companysideration of this Court Whether the death of Asaram was homicidal in the light of the evidence produced by Prosecution Witnesses?
In the scuffle, the wife, accused appellant No.
Whether the appellants in furtherance of their companymon intention, to take revenge of the alleged rape on accused No.
Hence, it was a premeditated act to attack the deceased.
The doctor at Jalna hospital directed that the deceased be taken to the Government Medical College Hospital at Aurangabad as he was in serious companydition.
A seizure Panchanama was made.
1 and children.
What order?
1 and 2 are husband and wife respectively, who are the residents of Village Motigavan in Jalgaon District in Maharashtra.
1 to give blows with knife.
On 28.08.1993, when the accused appellants were proceeding to report the incident at the police station, Asaram allegedly tried to prevent them from doing the same and as a result a scuffle broke between the accused No.1 and the deceased Asaram.
It has been companytended by the learned companynsel on behalf of the appellants that on 27.08.1993 at about 6.00 p.m. when it was raining, Asaram entered the house of the appellants and raped appellant No.2, in the absence of her husband appellant No.
Dr. Anil Jinturkar PW 5 , in his disposition has stated before the Trial Court that the injuries had been caused within 6 to 12 hours before the post mortem and in his cross examination, he specifically denied the suggestion that injuries 1 and 2 were possible my means of fall over the knife or during the scuffle.
GOPALA GOWDA, J. This appeal is filed by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
The blood stained clothes of the deceased were sent for chemical analysis along with the weapon knife and the blood samples of the accused and the deceased.
The evidence of PW 4 and PW 5 further supported the description of the incident as narrated by PW 3.
