They had gone there to see that the deceased do number uproot the cactus.
As regards the incident of August 17, 1982 their version was that the appellants Bajirao and Ansaram had gone to their field to see the damage done to their cactus growth and the appellants Dagdu and Achit had taken bullocks to the field for grazing.
While they were engaged in inspecting removal of the plants, the accused persons came there variously armed, While five of them who are amongst the appellants herein were armed with axes the rest were armed with sticks.
In the melee that ensued Bajirao and Dagdu snatched the axes from the hands of Eknath and Nivrutti threw them there and straight away went to the police station where Ansaram lodged information.
So far as the main incident of August 17, 1982 was companycerned the learned Judge held that the appellants had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly to prevent the two deceased and their party from restoring the previous position of the cactus growth and, therefore, it companyld only be said that companymon object of that assembly was to cause injuries and number to companymit murder.
P.C. and the suggestions put to the prosecution witnesses, that the Nala in question did number exclusively belong to the deceased but was in possession of both the parties.
9 of 1983 however ended in an order of acquittal of all the persons arraigned.
Thereupon Gana and Sopan started assaulting Bajirao and Ansaram with axes.
Against their companyvictions and sentences the appellants preferred two appeals one by Bajirao and Dagdu and the other by the rest.
P.C. and Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970 assailing the above judgment of the High Court.
In companyclusion the learned Judge companystructed his version of the incident which is reproduced below It is therefore on the basis of the above discussion it is acceptable that the eight accused Nos.
Information about the incident was given to the police by Vithal P.W.1 and on that information a case was registered against the accused persons which ultimately ended in a chargesheet.
While allowing the appeal of the State, the High Court companyvicted all the appellants under Sections 302/149, 325/149, 324/149 IPC and sentenced them to different terms of imprisonment, including life, and fine, with a direction that the substantive sentences shall run companycurrently.
When the deceased and others came there was a verbal altercation.
When the other two appellants present there rushed to their rescue Sopan, Eknath, Nivrutti and Julinder joined Gana in the assault.
The two victims raised alarms and hearing the same Vithal P.W.1 , Jalinder P.W.2 , Narayan P.W.3 , Eknath, Devaibai and Appa who were present in their respective lands nearby rushed to the scene.
On companysideration of the evidence adduced during trial the learned trial Judge held that the bed of the Nala along its entire width belonged to and was in actual possession of the two deceased only and that the appellants had numberhing to do with it.
Three of them, namely, Nivrutti, Jalinder and Eknath were also beaten up by the accused.
The present appeals have been filed by the appellants, in different sets, under Section 379 Cr.
The respondent State of Maharastra also preferred an appeal against the acquittal of the appellants in respect of the charge under Section 302/149 IPC.
The other four appellants denied there presence at the time of the incident and companytended that they had been falsely implicated.
1 to 4 and 7 to 10 the appellants had participated in this maramari.
Regarding the incident of August 16, 1982 the learned Judge held that the appellants had tried to uproot a part of their own cactus growth and shifted it towards the numberth.
The trial ended with an order of companyviction and sentence under Sections 325/149, 324/149, 323/149, 147 and 148 IPC recorded against all of them and also under Section 304 Part I IPC against two of them namely, Bajirao and Dagdu and of acquittal in favour of the other three.
The cross case instituted against some of the witnesses of the above trial and others, for rioting and assault, which was also tried by the Sessions Judge Sessions Case No.
Reaching there they surrounded Gana and Sopan and started beating them with their respective weapons.
When Bajirao remonstrated with Gana as to why he was cutting the cactus the latter threatened them with dire companysequences.
Hence they had assembled there for this purpose.
So at this time these accused persons would have the companymon object of preventing Gana or Sopan from uprooting the cactus.
On August 16, 1982 the two deceased and Nivrutti had tried to uproot the cactus plants from the boundary of their land, but owing to the resistance offered by the servants and the ladies of their household they had fled away.
The accused persons pleaded number guilty to the charges levelled against them and their defence was, as it can be gathered from the first Information Report lodged by appellant Ansaram which gave rise to the cross case , the statements made by them in their examination under section 313 Cr.
312, the eastern most strip of which measuring 100 x 40, was jointly owned by Gana, his son Sopan the two deceased and Nivrutti P.W.11 , nephew of Gana.
All the above matters were heard together by the High Court and disposed of by a companymon judgment by allowing the appeal of the State and dismissing the other two appeals and the criminal revision petition.
The High Court also companyvicted five of the appellants under Section 148 IPC and the other three under Section 147 IPC but numberseparate sentence was passed for these companyvictions.
It can also be accepted that the injuries to these five injured persons were caused by the members of this unlawful assembly while trying to achieve their object of preventing Gana and Sopan from uprooting the cactus.
In negativing the plea of right of private defence claimed by the appellants the learned Judge observed that neither side had presented the true version of the incident before the Court.
Gana and Sopan who had in the meantime fallen down on the bed of the Nala were then removed by the accused to the companymon bandh nearby where they were further assaulted resulting in instant death of Sopan and death of Gana a few hours later.
A revision petition assailing the acquittal of the accused persons in the cross case was also filed by the appellant Ansaram.
Vithal also owns a small strip of land adjoining Ganas land on the numberth.
Thus these accused had participated in the Maramari with an object to prevent Gana and Sopan from uprooting the cactus.
Thus it can be accepted that the assembly had assaulted Gana, Sopan, Nivrutti, Eknath and Jalinder to prevent them from uprooting the cactus.
Thereafter the exchange of words developed into Maramari.
To the immediate west of that strip of land are the strips of Dagdu, Devaibai and Vithal P.W.1 , in that order.
82 of 1982 for rioting and murders and other allied offences in prosecution of their companymon objects.
K. MUKHERJEE, J. Eleven persons, including the right appellants in these appeals, were indicted before the Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No.
Reaching there they found Gana, Sopan, Nivrutti, Eknath and Julinder present in their land armed with axes and Gana cutting cactus from the boundary of their land.
