Hence the present appeal.
The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PW 8 supported by the medical evidence and companyroborated by PW 9 and other witnesses.
The trial companyrt disbelieved PW 8 for the simple reason that he did number state in the FIR about the presence of PW 9.
The accused were arrested and the charge sheet was laid.
The appellant in his statement under Section 313 CrPC stated that he was a political worker and that PW 8 canvassed against him in the elections.
He was in charge of the library started by him and others in the village.
PW 9 also came to the verandah.
He went and reported the matter to A 1.
The appellant was the Director of the Milk Dairy of Ward Factory and also the Chairman of the Market Committee at Kolhapur and a political worker.
PW 9 who was informed about the companydition of PW 8 also came there.
PW 8 asked PW 1 as to why he was frequently visiting the village and also scolded him for carrying an axe with him.
He opined that these injuries were caused with a sharp edged weapon like a knife.
Shivaji Aba, PW 8 was treated in the hospital as an in patient till August 18, 1973 and thereafter he was discharged.
According to him, he did number step out of the office of the panchayat and he stated that he has been falsely implicated.
From the Judgment and Order dated January 20, 1981 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Thereafter there was some scuffle between PW 8 and A 1 and both of them came in the verandah.
He brought a rickshaw and took Shivaji Aba to the police station, gave a report there and then took him to the Civil Hospital, Kolhapur.
775 of 1975 On April 13, 1973 at about 6 p.m. Ramajan, PW 1 met Shivaji Aba, PW 8 in the village.
PW 11 also came along with them from the village.
PW 8 rushed and took shelter in the house of his aunt.
The appellant sent him to the panchayat office and followed him there.
He also stated that he was present in Chavadi but he denied having slapped PW 8.
Dr Khare, PW 16 examined PW 8 and found four incised injuries which were clean cut on the epigastric region.
The High Court has rightly held that the reasons given by the trial companyrt for rejecting the evidence of PW 8, the victim, were wholly unsatisfactory and also perverse.
PW 9 also slapped PW 8 when he tried to abuse the appellant.
There the appellant inflicted injuries with a knife on PW 8.
As a matter of fact, the appellant himself did number dispute his presence in the village panchayat office at the time of the incident.
He also canvassed for some candidates in the elections and in 1967 helped the present appellant but in 1972 worked against the appellant.
A Division Bench of the High Court after having companysidered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses particularly that of the victim, companyvicted the appellant under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him to undergo five years RI.
He admitted the injured into hospital and Dr Wagle, PW 17 attended on the injured PW 8 and treated him.
The trial companyrt acquitted all of them.
PW 8 immediately lodged the FIR in which all the details were given and it was clearly stated that it was the appellant who slapped him.
The accused denied the offence.
The appellant was also charged under Section 307 simpliciter.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. The appellant Tukaram Gundu Naik was tried along with two others for an offence punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC.
As a result of this, the relations between the appellant and the family of Shivaji Aba were number good.
In their presence the appellant asked PW 8 why he has assaulted PW 1.
A 2 and A 3 are alleged to have hurled stones at PW 8.
There was a scuffle between the two and PW 1 received an injury.
The State preferred an appeal and it was admitted against the appellant and dismissed against the other two by the High Court.
The victim Shivaji Aba, PW 8 is also a resident of the same village and used to take active part in the village activities.
Aba Dnyanu, PW 9, the father of PW 8, is the police patil of the village.
Thereafter he sent for the police patil and the sarpanch.
Meanwhile an offence was registered under Section 326 IPC and investigation proceeded.
Both of them came there.
The prosecution case is as follows A 1 the appellant herein and A 2 are the real brothers and A 3 is the son of A 1 and they are residents of Pokhale, Taluka Panhala.
So saying he slapped Shivaji Aba, PW 8 twice.
