AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
 M. G. Giratkar, J
Appellant challenged the judgment of conviction awarded by learned Sessions Judge, Yavatmal in Sessions Case No. 28/2015 by which appellant is
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/Â in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case of the prosecution against the appellant can be summarized as under.
(i) Deceased Anita was married with appellant in the year 1995. She delivered three sons from the appellant. Appellant always used to suspect the
character of his wife Anita. He was always quarreling with her and beating her. Anita disclosed the said illtreatment and beating to her parents
on several times. On 2Â102014, there was a religious function at the house of father of Anita. Anita along with children and appellant came to the
house of her father at Village Chichghat. On 3Â10Â2014, at about 10Â11 a.m. appellant and his children went to his Village Kinhala. On 3Â‐
102014, in the evening at about 7.00 p.m., Anita was taking rest along with her mother in the courtyard. Her father was giving swing to cradle of his
grandson. Appellant came with dagger(suri) and gave blow on chest of Anita for 2Â3 times. Father of Anita caught hold the appellant and
snatched dagger. Mother of deceased, her sisterÂinÂlaw and others rushed to the spot. Brother of deceased, namely, Vasanta taken her to the
hospital at Yavatmal. She was declared dead by doctor. Father of deceased, namely, Punaji Jadhao lodged report, Exhibit 48. Crime No. 90/2014
was registered against the appellant.
(ii) API Kharde investigated the crime. He sent dead body for postmortem, went to the spot, prepared spot panchanama etc., seized clothes of
deceased, accused and also weapon i.e. dagger(suri) in presence of panchas, recorded statements of witnesses, sent the seized property to the
Chemical Analyser. After complete investigation, he filed chargeÂsheet before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class which in turn committed
to the Court of Sessions at Yavatmal.
(iii) Charge was framed at Exhibit 7. Same was readover and explained to the accused/appellant. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried. Defence appears to be of total denial.
Prosecution has examined 11 witnesses. At the conclusion of trial, learned trial Court convicted appellant as stated above.
Heard learned counsel Shri Chande appearing on behalf of Shri Kalsi, Advocate for the appellant. He has pointed out omissions and
contradictions in the evidence of witnesses and submitted that evidence of eye witnesses are not reliable. Learned counsel has submitted that
appeal be allowed and appellant be acquitted for the offence charged against him.
Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Pathan for the State/respondent. He has submitted that P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 7 are the eye
witnesses of the incident. They have stated that there was religious program on the earlier day of the incident. Appellant along with his deceased
wife and children had been to the house of his fatherÂinÂlaw. On the day of incident in the morning at about 10Â11 a.m., appellant along with his
children went to his Village, Kinhala. In the evening, deceased Anita along with her mother were taking rest on bedÂsheet in the courtyard. Her
father Punaji was giving swing to cradle of his grandson, that time, appellant came there and gave blows of knife on the chest of Anita. Punaji
caught hold the appellant. Anita was taken to the hospital of Dr. Arvind Pawar. He declared her brought dead. Evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and
P.W. 7 is well corroborated with each other. Some minor omissions in the evidence of witnesses who are rustic villagers not affected the
prosecution case.
5.Evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 7 is well corroborated by the medical evidence.  P.W. 8 Dr. Vinod Bhalerao has stated that on 4Â10Â‐
2014, he has conducted postmortem on the dead body of Anita and found following external injuries.
[1] Stab wound over left side of upper anterior part of the chest between 2nd and 3rd rib of size 4 x 1.8 x cavity deep approximately 4.3 cm., elliptical
in shape, margins clean cut and blood infiltrated, obliquely placed with inner end lower than upper outer end. The maximum width was 3 mm. The
upper end was 7cm. From mid clavicular point, 7 cm. From midline and 34 cm. From anterior superior iliase spine. Both angles were acute.Â
Medial end was undermined. Track of the wound skinÂsubcutaneous tissue â€" muscles of chest wall. Direction of the wound upward,
backward and medial.
[2] Stab wound over right side of posterior part of middle chest between 6th and 7th ribs of size 3 x 1 x cavity deep, on approximation 3.5 cm,
elleptical in shape, margins clean cut and blood infiltrated. Stab wound obliquely placed with inner end lower than upper outer end. The maximum
width 3 mm. The upper end was 22 cm from left acromion, 13 cm from midline and 107 cm from hill. Both angles were acute and lateral end
was undermined. Track of the wound â€" skin â€" subcutaneous tissue  muscles of back Âintercostal space between 6th and 7th ribs â€
intercostal muscles â€" right 6th and 7th ribs  pleura  right lung. Direction of the wound upward, forwardward and medially.
According to P.W. 8, both the injuries were antemortem. From perusal of the evidence of Medical Officer, it is clear that both the injuries were on
the chest. Appellant inflicted both the injuries by dagger (suri). The appellant gave forcible blow. Right lung of deceased was ruptured. This
itself shows that appellant had intention to kill deceased.
Evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 7 show that on the earlier day of incident, appellant along with his deceased wife and children came to the
house of his fatherÂinÂlaw. On the day of incident, in the morning at about 10Â11 a.m., appellant along with his children went to his Village,
Kinhala. On the same day, in the evening, he came with preparation having dagger in his hand. His wife Anita was taking rest with her mother in
the courtyard. Appellant stabbed her by dagger on her chest. Appellant gave both blows of dagger on vital part of the body of deceased.Â
Therefore, it is clear that appellant had intention to kill deceased. Evidence of witnesses also corroborated by Chemical Analyser's Report.
Chemical Analyser Report, Exhibit 63 shows that dagger (suri) was stained with human blood. Clothes of deceased and accused were stained with
blood group 'O'. Blood group of deceased not determined. Blood group of appellant was determined as 'A'. Therefore, it is clear that blood on the
clothes of deceased and accused were of deceased. Appellant not explained as to how his clothes were stained with blood.
Prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that at the time of incident, appellant with an intention to kill deceased by giving two blows on the
vital part of body of deceased by dangerous weapon i.e. dagger (suri). Learned trial Court rightly appreciated the evidence on record. There is
no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment is well reasoned. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order :
(i) The appeal is dismissed.
(ii) R & P be sent back to the trial Court.