P.W. 2 questioned as to why he was abusing.
Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the view taken by the Sessions Court is reasonable under the circumstances of the case and that the accused had reasonable apprehension that the deceased was likely to cause grievous hurt or death to them and therefore in exercise of right of self defence they caused the death of the deceased and also caused injuries to P.W. 2.
The presence of P.W. 2 at the scene of occurrence cannot be doubted.
The prosecution case is as follows The accused, the deceased and P.W. 2 belong to the same Village Nanota.
P.W. 2 however gave a report at the Shihori Police Station.
On seeing them P.W. 2 questioned as to why they were planting like that.
It was bone deep.
He alongwith his father Bhanji Shamji Joshi A 1 was tried for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The charge was that on 25.12.77 at about 6 p.m. both of them in furtherance of their companymon intention caused the death of Dhuda Ramsang, the deceased in the case and they also caused injuries to P.W. 2, the father of the deceased thereby companymitting an offence punishable under Section 325/34 I.P.C. On behalf of the accused a plea of self defence was set up and the trial companyrt accepted the plea and acquitted both the accused.
On opening the skull, he found the fractures of both the parietal bones and also laceration of the brain.
The deceased, son of P.W. 2, came rushing from another field and seeing him A 1 dealt a dharia blow and A 2 dealt a pick axe blow on his head with the result he fell down and died.
On the deceased he found the following injuries Contused lacerated wound in size of 1 1/2 x 1/2 horizontal at right interior parietal region.
On 25.12.77 sometime in the evening P.W. 2 was at his field and he was returning to his house.
It was bone deep.
The Doctor was number available there.
On P.W. 2 the Doctor found two wheel marks in size of about 4 x 1/2 over right lateral side of chest and a fracture of right side of 10th rib.
P.C. read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
P.W. 2, raised an alarm.
He saw A 1 and A 2 planting some cactus plants near the border of their field.
The State preferred an appeal against the said order of acquittal.
Thereupon a quarrel ensued and A 1 abused him.
Jayachandra Reddy, J. This is an appeal under Section 379 Cr.
The doctor opined that the two injuries companyld have been caused by blunt weapon.
He opined that the death was due to head injuries.
The injured were placed on a cart and they were taken to the hospital.
The appellant is the original accused No.
Contused lacerated wound in size of 2 x 1/2 vertical right anterior parietal region.
An inquest was held and thereafter the Doctor examined P.W. 2 and also companyducted the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased.
Thereupon, it is alleged that A 1 dealt a dharia blow in his back.
