- (1.)Heard learned advocate Mr. J. V. Patil appearing for appellant/original accused Nos. 1 to 3, learned advocate Mr. Choudhari, appearing for appellant/original accused No. 4 and learned APP ms. Gadhvi appearing for the State.
(2.)This appeal is filed by all the four accused challenging their conviction under sections 302 r/w 34, and 392 r/w 34 of the Indian penal Code. Though single appeal is filed by all the accused and any one of the two advocates would have been required to argue because the defence of any of the accused was not conflicting, We permitted advocate Mr. Patil to add certain points in defence and in support of submissions made by advocate Mr. Choudhari.
(3.)Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are the brothers and accused No. 4 is their cousin. They were residing in village Ghunaki, Tal. Hatkanangale, dist. Kolhapur. Accused No. 1 was the owner and conducted a panshop in Shivneri Chowk of village ghunaki. He wanted to sell it. One Kashinath sidh wanted to purchase the same and through mediation of deceased Kishor Bhanuse, a transaction was settled for Rs. 31,000/- out of which Rs. 5,000/- was paid on the very day of possession of that panshop was handed over by accused No. 1 to Kashinath. This was about a month before the incident. It appears that there after accused No. 1 changed his mind and wanted to revoke the contract. Two days after the contract, accused No. 1 met Kashinath Sid (PW 16) and told him about his intention. Kashinath, in turn, told accused No. 1 that they should consult the mediators i. e. Kishor and one Sardar.