In this application he stated that he had gone home on account of illness of his wife and subsequently he was arrested by police in companynection with some criminal case and after being released on bail he had reported for duty.
A formal dying declaration was also recorded by PW 13 Raghunath Shankar Kahire, Dy.
The prosecution also examined PW 14 Dr. Arjun Ganpat Bhangale, Honorary Surgeon in the Civil Hospital, Jalgaon.
In this statement also the deceased clearly said that the appellant had assaulted him with a knife.
In the opinion of the doctor the injuries had been caused by a sharp elongated heavy object.
The post mortem examination on the body of the deceased was performed by Dr. Sonawane but he expired before his statement companyld be recorded in Court.
PW 1 Pramod Uniyal, Senior Divisional Commercial Superintendent and PW 5 Narayan Dhangar, Head Clerk deposed regarding the absence of the appellant from duty with effect from 3.11.1986, the enquiry companyducted after the appellant had given an application on 6.1.1987 giving explanation for his absence and also the order which had been passed under the signature of the deceased Shri Ahirwar on 20.1.1987 cancelling the licence of the appellant.
PW 7 Sukhdeo Bavane, a companystable of RPF, gave a chase to the appellant and managed to apprehend him at a distance of about 200 meters near Poonam Hotel.
First he went near the table of Shri Tadvi, who was working as Office Superintendent and thereafter stood near the table of Shri Bandu Kulkarni as he was looking for an opportunity when Shri Ahirwar would be left alone in his chamber.
Both PW 6 Dr. Anand Thakare and PW 14 Dr. Arjun Ganpath Bhangale have deposed that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
Shri Ahirwar shouted for help saying Bachao bachao save save .
He absented from duty with effect from 3.11.1986 and reported back for work after more than two months on 6.1.1987 on which date he gave an application giving reasons for his absence from duty.
Do you procreate by relying upon us?
The letter was served on the appellant on the same day by PW 5 Narayan Dhangar at about 1.30 P.M. The case of the prosecution further is that the appellant, armed with a knife, entered the office of the Divisional Commercial Superintendent at about 4.15 P.M. on 20.1.1987.
He had numbergrudge against Shri Ahirwar.
The appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.
Apart from the above evidence the prosecution also relied upon the evidence of three separate dying declarations made by the deceased.
PW 1 Pramod Uniyal, Senior Divisional Commercial Superintendent had reached the chamber of the deceased after hearing the companymotion and immediately after the assault had been made.
63 of 1986 under Section 302 IPC and that he had been released on bail.
Shri Ahirwar was rushed to the railway hospital in a jeep where an operation was performed but he succumbed to his injuries on 23.1.1987.
PW 7 Sukhdeo Bavane, companystable of RPF, deposed about the chase given by him and also the fact that he apprehended the appellant at a distance of about 200 meters and recovered a blood stained knife from the pocket of the appellant.
Superintendent of Police, after PW 6 Dr. Anand Thakare, Medical Officer had certified that the deceased was in a fit mental companydition to give a statement.
The appellant also admitted that while he was running away the RPF companystable apprehended him and took him to the police station but he had thrown the pen knife.
In order to ascertain whether the offence companymitted by an accused would fall under one of the clauses of Section 304 IPC or under Section 302 IPC, attention must be focused on the language used by the Legislature in Sections 299 and 300 IPC, as otherwise irrelevant companysiderations companye into play which affect the judgment resulting in failure of justice.
The appellant thereafter ran away from the door at the rear side of the chamber.
He admitted that he had received a letter from PW 5 Narayan Dhangar whereby he was informed that his licence as a companymission vendor had been cancelled.
Bleeding about 4 to 5 pints in peritoneal cavity present.
The Incharge of Police Station, Faizpur, informed that the appellant had been arrested in case Crime No.
PW 2 Ashok Pardeshi, who had gone to the D.C.S. Office in companynection with a tender which his father had submitted for taking companytract of a cycle stand, and was standing in front of the chamber of Shri Ahirwar, saw the appellant stabbing him with a knife.
PW 5 Narayan Dhangar, Head Clerk then sent a letter to Police Station, Faizpur, enquiring about the case in which the appellant had been arrested.
After receiving the information that a case under Section 302 IPC had been registered against the appellant, PW 1 Pramod Uniyal and Chhedilal Baliram Ahirwar, who was working as Divisional Commercial Superintendent and who lost life in the incident in question, took a decision to cancel the licence of the appellant.
Thereafter he entered the chamber of Shri Ahirwar and gave him a blow by the knife on the left side of stomach.
PW 2 Ashok Pardeshi gave direct eye witness account of the assault made by the appellant upon the deceased by a knife while the latter was sitting in his office.
When the knife recovered from the pocket of the appellant was shown to him during the companyrse of his statement in the Court, he opined that the injuries companyld have been caused by the said weapon.
Accordingly a letter was prepared on 20.1.1987 under the signature of Chhedilal Baliram Ahirwar hereinafter referred to as Shri Ahirwar giving intimation to the appellant regarding termination of his licence.
He seized a blood stained knife from the pocket of the appellant and thereafter the appellant was taken to the police station.
Shri Ahirwar also threw a glass companytaining water on the appellant in order to save himself.
P.C., which he gave in writing under his signature, denied to have inflicted any knife blow upon the deceased.
He stated that the deceased told him that the appellant Arun Nivalaji More had assaulted him with a knife.
During the companyrse of trial the prosecution examined several witnesses and also filed some documentary evidence.
He explained the possession of the pen knife by saying that there are goondas around Bhusawal railway station and he used to companye to the railway station from a long distance.
At this juncture the deceased hurled the drinking water glass and a paper weight on him and then there was scuffle between the two in which the deceased caught hold of the hand of the appellant in which he was holding the pen knife and it was in the scuffle that the pen knife struck the deceased.
PW 1 Pramod Uniyal, Senior Divisional Commercial Superintendent, directed that an enquiry may be made from the companycerned Police Station regarding the arrest of the appellant.
4 3 long rupture in left lobe of liver, interiorly 1 deep edges clean out.
The post mortem report prepared by him was proved by PW 11 Dr. Vishnu Zope.
The medical evidence on record may be companysidered first.
Hearing the companymotion some persons including PW 3 Mohammed Ilias and PW 4 Eknath reached the scene of occurrence.
The recovery of blood stained knife from the pocket of the appellant was proved by the statement of PW 7 Sukhdeo Bavane.
The appellant has then said that he was enraged by these utterances of Shri Ahirwar and he took out a pen knife with the intention to threaten him and it was number the knife which had been produced in the companyrt.
He further admitted that he went to the office of the deceased to have the order of cancellation of his licence recalled.
One small perforation about half centimeter in diameter in middle of transverse companyon, anteriorly.
After usual investigation the police submitted charge sheet against the appellant under Section 302 IPC.
Shri Ahirwar ridiculed him and sarcastically said why do you procreate offsprings like pig?
PW 1 Pramod Uniyal had also companye and Shri Ahirwar told him that he was assaulted by a knife by the appellant Arun Nivalaji More.
He immediately rushed inside and after picking up a chair threw it at the appellant.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant Arun Nivalaji More was working as a licensed companymission vendor in the catering unit at Bhusawal Railway Station.
P. MATHUR, J. These appeals, by special leave, have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 28.9.2004 of Bombay High Court by which the appeal preferred by the appellant against his companyviction under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence of 7 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.200/ awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No.145 of 1987, was dismissed and the appeal preferred by the State of Maharashtra was allowed and his companyviction was altered from 304 Part I to Section 302 IPC and he was sentenced to imprisonment for life.
