LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-7

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SHANKAR BHIMRAO BINJADE

Decided On October 21, 2005
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant
V/S
SHANKAR BHIMRAO BINJADE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/state has preferred this appeal, challenging the judgment and order dated10th of May, 1996 passed by the Sessions Judge, Amravati in Sessions Case No. 106/95 in which the respondent/accused Shankar came to be acquitted of the charge of having committed murder of his brother Babulal Bhimrao Binjade and caused hurt to his wife P.W.7 Bilobai.

(2.) In nutshell, it is the prosecution case that deceased Babulal and respondent/accused Shankar were real brothers. Earlier the deceased with his family was residing in Madhya Pradesh. Respondent/accused Shankar brought them to Pusla prior to 5-6 months of the incident to get him settled there, as at the native place deceased Babulal not only used to quarrel with his father but also create nuisance in the locality, under the influence of liquor. On the day of the incident at about8. 30 p. m. when deceased Babulal was to take his dinner, the respondent/accused Shankar came to the hut of deceased and called him out. They both abused and quarrelled under the influence of liquor and in the said quarrel respondent/accused Shankar assaulted his brother Babulal with the stick (Article 7) and when his wife P.W.7 Bilobai came out, he assaulted her also and her son Subhash (P.W.8 ). It appears that, in the quarrel respondent/accused Shankar also suffered some injuries but as Babulal and Bilobai fell down, P.W.8 Subhash ran to the police station and came with the Police. All the injured in the incident including respondent/accused Shankar were taken to the hospital where they came to be examined by P.W.9 Dr. Ramesh Patil. INjured Babulal and Bilobai were sent to the General Hospital, Amravati. At General Hospital, Amravati Babulal Bhimrao Binjade succumbed to his injuries, therefore, inquest panchanama (Exh. 18) was prepared and his body was sent for autopsy, which was conducted by Dr. Nalini Shinde, who, on examination prepared the post mortem report (Exh. 21 ). The deceased was found to have suffered in all nine injuries out of which injury no.9 was found sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. IN the opinion of Dr. Nalini Shinde, the external injuries found on the body of the deceased could be caused by stick (Article 7 ). The police, in the course of investigation, recorded statements of the family members of both the brothers. Spot panchanama was conducted, at the instance of respondent/accused Shankar. Stick (Article 7) was discovered from his house. After completion of the investigation charge-sheet came to be filed and that is how the case against the respondent/accused was committed to the court of Sessions.

(3.) Mr. M. R. Daga, the learned counsel for the respondent/accused submitted that the learned trial court has analysed the evidence of the two witnesses namely P.W.7 Bilobai and P.W.8 Subhash and found that they being interested witnesses, their evidence is not reliable and further, as the prosecution failed to bring on record the genesis of the offence by explaining the injuries suffered by the respondent/accused, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the respondent/accused beyond shadow of doubt.