GOPAL BAJIRAO ANKUSHRAO Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these five Appeals are decided by this common Judgment as they are directed against one and the same Judgment of 1st Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No. 263 of 2010, thereby convicting the Appellants, who are the Original Accused Nos. 1 to 6, for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w. Section 120-B of the IPC and under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for three months on first count and R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default to suffer R.I. for one month on the second count. Facts, as are necessary, for deciding these Appeals can be stated in brief as follows:-

(2.) On this complaint, C.R. No. 28 of 2010 came to be registered under Section 302 of the IPC. During the course of investigation, P.W. - 30 API Haragbal made Spot Panchanama (Exhibit-95) and seized the motor cycle, the rod, the goggle of the deceased along with the blood stained Sickle, stone and other articles lying at the spot under Panchanama (Exhibit-95). Then, he made Inquest Panchanama of the dead body (Exhibit-83) and sent it for autopsy. The cause of the death was found to be head injury as per the Post Mortem Report (Exhibit-108). He recorded further statements of the witnesses in the next four days and thereafter arrested the various Accused. During their Police custody, at the instance of Accused No. 1 Arjun, the Sickle. Nokia Mobile Phone and blood stained clothes were recovered under Panchanama, whereas, at the behest of Accused No. 3 Pramod also, the blood stained clothes came to be seized under Panchanama. At the instance of Accused No. 5 Nisar also, his clothes, one Sickle came to be seized under Panchanama. Then all these seized articles were sent to Chemical Analyzer and after completion of due investigation, Charge-Sheet came to be filed in the Court against the Accused.

(3.) On case being committed to the Sessions Court, the Trial Court framed charge against the Accused vide Exhibit-15. The Accused abjured the guilt and claimed trial raising the defence of total innocence.