- (1.) All three appeals are being disposed of by common judgment since they arise out of judgment and order dated 13th December, 2003 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati in Sessions Case No.129/2000.
(2.) The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.349/2003 is original accused no.4 and respondent Nos.1 to 3 in Criminal Appeal No.465/2003 are accused Nos.1 to 3 respectively in Sessions Trial No.129/2000. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and accused no.4 has been acquitted of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code but convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 38 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and pay fine of Rs. One thousand and in default to suffer R.I. for three months. By filing Criminal Appeal Nos.349/2003 and 465/2003 the accused have challenged their conviction and sentences. Criminal Appeal No.349/2003 has been filed by the State of Maharashtra challenging acquittal of original accused no.4 for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) Briefly, the facts relevant for disposal of the present appeal, are as under: Shardabai Sankat (PW 1) wife of deceased Arun Sankat resident of Masanganj area, Sweeper Mohalla, Amravati lodged report against all the accused and one deceased Raju Natthu alias Arpan Gohar (since deceased) on 20.3.2000 stating therein that on 20.3.2000, which was the day of "Holi" she was present along with her husband in the house. At about 11.00 a. m. they came to know that one Manoj was quarreling with Sunil and Bharat. Therefore, her husband went there to intervene in the quarrel and returned back to the house after successful intervention. Thereafter at about 2.00 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. both of them heard that Manoj and Gopal were assaulting Sunil and Bharat. Therefore, her husband went for their rescue followed by Shardabai. She noticed that accused no.4 had caught of her husband and accused no.1 Gopal blow of knife on the chest of her husband. Accused no.2 Manoj and accused no.3 Rajesh also assaulted the husband with knives with long blade. Thereupon her husband started shouting for rescue saying "Bachav Bachav". He fell down due to the assault with knife upon him. He was lying in a pool of blood. Thereupon her son Bharat and Sunita reached there. Her husband was removed from the said place and taken to the house. She offered water to the husband and thereafter her husband was taken to the hospital. She also went to the hospital where she was informed that her husband had expired. She lodged report at Nagpuri Police Station, pursuant to which, F.I.R. was lodged against four accused as well as deceased Raju Nathu Gohar. Pursuant to the F.I.R., investigation was taken up. The spot panchanama as well as seizure panchanama was drawn. Thereafter inquest panchanama was also drawn on dead body of deceased Arun and his body was forwarded for post-mortem examination. The clothes of deceased were seized. All the accused were arrested. During the investigation, as per memorandum statements of the accused weapons were seized. The clothes of the accused were also seized. The articles seized were sent for analysis for Chemical Analyser. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the accused in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati. Since the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Amravati, which was made over to the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati. In Sessions Trial No.129/2000 the prosecution examined ten witnesses and produced several documents to prove the offence against the accused. Defence of the accused Nos.1 to 3 was of denial and false implication. The defence of accused no.4 was that he was in service of Zilla Parishad and social worker. He was providing money to the needy persons without interest. The deceased and relatives of the deceased were dealing in money lending business and as such they were against him and, therefore, he was falsely involved in the case. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, upon appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution, held that the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against accused nos.1 to 3 and accused no.4 was held liable for offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 38 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequently, all the accused were convicted and sentenced as stated above.;