Sanjay thereupon accompanied Khandu who took him to the top floor of Bharti Lodge, where Sanjay found his brother Vijay in injured companydition tied to the company with his hands and legs tied.
The body of the deceased Vijay was subjected to the inquest panchnama as well as post mortem examination.
Sanjay lodged companyplaint in writing at Bhadrakali Police Station where the FIR was registered relating to offences under Sections 302, 342, 143, 147 and 149 IPC read with Section 37 1 read with Section 135 of the Bombay Act.
The iron pipe was recovered at the instance of the accused No.1 Sham Kankaria, Coir Cord and pieces of wooden pegs having blood stains were seized from the spot of the incident.
Challenge was made to the same before the High Court, as numbered above.
At about 2o clock in the night between the 13th and 14th January, 1992, accused Khandu went to the house of Vijay and knocked the door of his house.
Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows On 13th January, 1992 one Vijay Bablu, the son of Kashinath Kedare, who was residing with his parents and other members of the family in House No.1342, situated at Khadkali area of Nasik City, was called by the accused No.3 Sanjay and the accused No.5 Khandu and, therefore, he left his house at about 8 p.m. along with the said accused persons.
Accordingly, companyviction was recorded and sentence imposed as numbered earlier.
On companyclusion of the investigation, all the six accused were charge sheeted.
Sanjay thereupon carried Vijay to his residence and Vijay once again narrated the said incident to his mother in the presence of Sanjay and from there, he was taken in a rickshaw to the Civil Hospital, Nasik.
For the third offence, all the six were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/ each with default stipulation.
On opening the door by Sanjay Kedare P.W.9 , accused Khandu informed Sanjay that his brother Vijay had been assaulted and was lying at some place.
On the way to the hospital, Vijay became unconscious and on being admitted to the hospital, he was declared to have been dead.
He did number return till late night.
Similar was the case in the appeals filed by the State, so far as they were companycerned.
In support of the appeals, learned companynsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has number kept in view the companyrect principles of law.
They were tried before learned Additional Sessions Judge and were companyvicted and sentenced by the judgment and order dated 6th February, 1993.
The blood sample of the deceased was also companylected and sent for medical analysis along with the clothes on the body of the deceased.
The other was for enhancement of sentence.
The medical officer opined that the death of Vijay was due to shock, intracranial hemorrhage and due to fracture of skull.
In any event, the High Court should number have interfered with the well reasoned and well discussed judgment of the trial companyrt without indicating any reason or basis therefor.
While the accused persons challenged their companyviction and sentence, the State questioned companyrectness of the judgment of the trial companyrt and prayed for enhancement of sentence and for companyviction under Section 302 of the first accused and under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC in respect of each of the accused persons.
9 and 10 also lack credibility.
During the pendency of the appeals, accused No.3 Sanjay and accused No.5 Khandu Deoram Abhang expired.
After carrying out the spot panchnama, the articles at the spot of the incident including the blood scrapping were companylected from the scene of offence.
Therefore, the two appeals filed by them were held to have abated.
The seized articles were sent for examination by the Chemical Analyser.
On companymencement of the investigation, all the six accused were arrested, their clothes were seized under the panchnama.
The High Court analysed the evidence and was of the view that the trial companyrt was number justified in acquitting the accused persons of the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and by only companyvicting accused No.1 Sham Shankar Kankaria in terms of Section 304 Part II IPC.
For rest of the accused the appeal filed by the State was allowed and the appeals filed by the accused persons were dismissed.
700 702 of 2005 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. These appeals are directed against a companymon judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court by which eight appeals were disposed of.
Even according to the prosecution, there was only one injury inflicted on the head of the deceased.
So called dying declaration before Sanjay and Hirabai PWs.
The two appeals filed by the State were allowed, except in respect of two who had died, while the six appeals filed by the accused persons were dismissed.
Sanjay released the hands and legs of Vijay and asked him as to how it had happened, whereupon he was told by Vijay that all the six accused after tying him to the company, assaulted him severely with instruments like iron pipe and wooden stick on the allegation that he had stolen a bicycle.
Their evidence does number inspire companyfidence and in fact they companytradict each other in many material aspects.
The accused Nos.1 to 6 were acquitted of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 135 of Bombay Act.
The appeals were directed against the judgment and order dated 6th February, 1993 passed by the learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik whereby accused No.1 Sham Shankar Kankaria was companyvicted for offence punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC.
With Crl.
A. Nos.
A. No.
634 636 of 2005, Crl.
Six of them were by the accused persons while two were by the State.
358 of 2005, Crl.
A. Nos.
Out of the two Criminal Appeals filed by the State, one was against the acquittal of the accused persons of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC and of Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 in short the Bombay Act .
Sanjay also saw some blood oozing out from the head of Vijay.
