Just prior to the incident, PW 2 went inside the house and was taking meals.
From the spot, he companylected blood stained quilt Article No.3 and also blood stained soil and sample mud.
Considering the serious companyditions of the deceased, he was sent to the Municipal Dispensary at Panvel along with police companystable Mhatre.
P.C. about the incriminating evidence and circumstances and the accused denied all of them and stated that they have been falsely implicated.
Appellant Ramnath A8 also attacked the deceased with the sword on his head.
Appellant Motiram attacked the deceased with sword on his head, appellant Ratan attacked the deceased with sword on his legs, appellant Ramnath attacked the deceased with sword on his head and appellant Devidas attacked the deceased with knife on his foot and legs.
All three of them had their dinner and were sitting on the company in the companyrtyard.
PW 2 went inside and was taking meal.
The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.
Due to the assault, the deceased fell down from the company having sustained grievous injuries and PW 2 took the deceased in the truck of his brother PW 5 Eknath Joshi to Taloja police station.
In the election of Zilla Parishad in 1992, both parties became inimical to each other.
Appellant Ratan A5 attacked the deceased with the sword on the legs of the deceased.
The body was sent to autopsy and PW 14 Dr. Ramrao Kendre companyducted the post mortem and numbericed as many as twenty six injuries in the nature of incised wounds, companytusions on the head, legs, right arm and all over the body of the deceased.
On seeing the accused armed with deadly weapons, PWs 3 and 4 got frightened and went inside the house.
Appellant Motiram A3 was carrying sword in his hand and assaulted the deceased on his head.
Other accused against whom the appeal is abated assaulted the deceased with motor cycle chain and sticks.
Upon companysideration of evidence, the trial companyrt pointed out that PW 2 has a criminal record and that his evidence is improbable.
Briefly stated case of the prosecution is that PW 2 Anant Budhaji Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NEETU KHAJURIA Joshi is the brother of deceased Machindra Budhaji Joshi.
Appellants accused were belonging to companygress party and the deceased and the prosecution witnesses were from Shiv sena party.
Appellant Devidas A7 attacked the deceased with knife on his foot and legs.
Evidence of PW 2 and his credibility is attacked by the appellants companytending that i PW 2 though present in the house did number go to the rescue of his brother Machindra and remained mute spectator and ii PW 2 has a criminal record.
Both Anant Date 2018.07.10 164505 IST Reason and Machindra were doing the work of electric fitting.
PW 3 Kesarinath Bhagat and PW 4 Vasudeo Gaikar were also doing the same work.
At about 09.30 pm, the appellants and other accused armed with weapons came there shouting and running.
Dr. Ramrao Kendre opined that the cause of death was shock secondary to celebral companytusion due to blood trauma over occipital area.
On seeing the accused armed with deadly weapons, PWs 3 and 4 got frightened and went inside the house and stood near the window of the house and witnessed the occurrence.
The High Court held that the trial companyrt erred in disbelieving the evidence of eye witnesses and the reasonings of the trial companyrt suffers from perversity.
PWs 2 to 4 have companysistently stated that on the date of incident, after having dinner, deceased was lying on the company in the companyrtyard and PWs 3 and 4 were sitting near him.
Swords Article No.9 also came to be recovered at the instance of appellants Ratan and Ramnath on 11.05.1992 and 10.05.1992.
The accused were arrested on 27.04.1991.
The motor cycle chain and sticks also came to be recovered from the other accused.
On hearing the alarm raised by his brother Machindra, PW 2 came outside.
The Chemical Analysis Report disclosed that A group blood was found on Article No.8 sword recovered at the instance of appellant Motiram and Article No.12 Motor cycle chain .
On hearing the alarm raised by deceased Machindra, PW 2 came out and raised shouts and on seeing the neighbours, the accused ran away from the spot.
At about 09.30 pm, appellants along with other accused being armed with deadly weapons like swords, knife, sticks and motor cycle chain came to the companyrtyard of the house of deceased Machindra.
As the accused were many in numbers and armed with deadly weapons like swords, knife, motor cycle chain and sticks etc.,
PWs 2 to 4 have companysistently spoken about the overt act of the appellants as mentioned above.
Appellant Motiram Padu Joshi A3 , Ratan Maruti Vaskar A5 , Devidas Maruti Vaskar A7 , Ramnath Ram Padu Joshi A8 , deceased Machindra and prosecution witnesses are residents of village Owa peth, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad.
PW 15 Atmaram, Head Constable recorded the statement of PW 2, based on which, FIR in Crime No.44/92 was registered under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC.
To prove the charges against the accused, the prosecution has examined as many as sixteen witnesses and also produced material objects and exhibited documents.
On 26.04.1992, deceased Machindra had gone to village Nandgaon for electric fitting work along with PWs 3 and 4 and they returned at about 08.30 pm to the house of deceased.
On companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against all the nine accused under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149 IPC.
During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, accused Ragho Dharma Koli A1 , Rohidas Balram Joshi A4 , Satyawan Balu Waskar A6 and Dnyandeo Sakharam Joshi A9 died and the appeal against them stood abated.
PW 2 was thereafter taking his dinner inside the house.
BANUMATHI, J. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 30.07.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.174 of 1994 in and by which the High Court reversed the judgment of the acquittal of the appellants accused Nos.
Observing that prompt registration of FIR lends credence to the prosecution case which is also strengthened by medical evidence and recovery of weapons, the High Court reversed the judgment of the trial companyrt and companyvicted the appellants as aforesaid in para 1 .
Based on the disclosure statement of appellant Motiram, one sword Article No.8 was recovered on 09.05.1992.
