Bombay High Court
Santosh S/O Rameshawar Bhoyar vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 16 January, 2018
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 319 OF 2015
Santosh S/o Rameshawar Bhoyar
Age : 33 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
R/o. Wangi Tq. & District Washim ... Appellant
VERSUS
(1) State of Maharashtra (Through
Police Station Officer, (Urban)
Washim Tq. & District Washim
(2) Madhukar S/o Shriram Bhoyar
Age - 49 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(3) Gajanan S/o Shriram Bhoyar
Age - 41 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(4) Ananda S/o Shriram Bhoyar
Age - 37 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(5) Uttam S/o Narayan Bhoyar
Age - 35 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(6) Vitthal S/o Govinda Bhoyar
Age - 49 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(7) Ratan S/o Govinda Bhoyar
Age - 50 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(8) Mahadeo S/o Vitthal Bhoyar
Age - 32 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(9) Pandurang S/o Govinda Bhoyar
Age - 45 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(10) Devakabai W/o Vitthal Bhoyar
Age - 50 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
2 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
(11) Vishnu S/o Ratan Bhoyar
Age-28 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(12) Namdeo S/o Narayan Bhoyar
Age-39 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(13) Kailas S/o Narayan Bhoyar
Age-45 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(14) Shankar S/o Vitthal Bhoyar
Age-29 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
(15) Pawan S/o Madhukar Bhoyar
Age-23 yrs Occu - Agriculturist
All R/o Wangi Tq. Distt. Washim. ... Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None for the appellant
Shri K. R. Lule, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1
Shri Abhishek S. Shukla, Advocate h/f Shri R. L. Khapre, Advocate for
respondent nos. 2 to 15
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
Date : 16/01/2018.
Judgment (Per : M.G. Giratkar, J.)
Present appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the
judgment of acquittal in Sessions Case No. 80/2011 passed by learned
Sessions Judge, Washim.
2. The case of the prosecution/appellant against the
accused/respondent nos. 2 to 15 in short is as under.
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
3 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
On 7-11-2010 at about 10.00 p.m. at Village Wangi, deceased was
working near his cattle shed, at that time, suddenly all the accused
started assaulting deceased by deadly weapons like sickle, spade, sticks
stones etc. with intention to kill. Condition of deceased was critical. He
had sustained bleeding injuries. He was immediately taken to the
hospital of Dr. Pande. Dr. Pande advised to take deceased to General
Hospital, Washim. Medical Officer examined and declared him dead.
On the report of son of deceased namely, Santosh, offences punishable
under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the
Indian Penal Code were registered against respondent nos. 2 to 15.
Investigating Officer after complete investigation filed charge-sheet
before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class which in turn
committed to the Court of Sessions.
3. Charge was framed against respondent nos. 2 to 15 at
Exhibit 18. Prosecution examined material witnesses. After hearing the
prosecution and defence, learned trial Court acquitted all the accused/
respondent nos. 2 to 15. Hence, the appellant filed the present appeal.
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
4 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
4. Heard learned counsel Shri Abhishek Shukla holding for
Shri R. L. Khapre, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 15 and
Shri K. R. Lule, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State/respondent no. 1. None appears for the appellant.
5. Perused the evidence and impugned judgment. From
perusal of evidence, it is clear that complainant himself taken the
deceased to the Government Hospital. Dr. Sarda, P.W. 8 conducted
postmortem on the dead body of deceased. As per his observations,
spleen of deceased was found ruptured. Cause of death was
hypovolumic shock due to rupture of spleen. Accordingly, he issued
postmortem report, Exhibit 83. P.W. 8 Dr. Sarda has stated that all the
injuries sustained by victim were on the left part of the body, on the leg
and back portion. He has admitted that if a person falls from the
bullock-cart then injuries no. 1 and 3 were possible and not injury no. 2.
If the nails attached to the bullock-cart comes into contact of body, then
injury no. 2 is possible. He has further stated that injury no. 2 is
possible if a person while putting him in the auto comes in contact of the
part of auto having sharp edge then injury no. 2 is possible.
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
5 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
6. It is the defence of the respondent nos. 2 to 15 that
deceased fell down from the bullock-cart and sustained injuries. This
defence is proved. Complainant himself given history to the Medical
Officer that deceased fell down from bullock-cart. Exhibit 55 is in
respect of the entries taken of indoor patient and the information
provided by complainant Santosh to the Medical Officer. In response to
the query made by the Investigating Officer, it was stated by Medical
Officer that on 7-11-2010 at about 11.45 p.m. at Casualty, Civil
Hospital, Washim, he was brought dead and he was declared so by him.
During that period, his son Santosh (complainant) told him that
deceased father Shri Rameshwar Bhoyar was found falling below the
bullock-cart and suspected that deceased died due to the fall from
bullock-cart.
7. This entry, Exhibit 55 taken in the hospital at the time of
examining deceased by Medical Officer clearly show that complainant
himself stated that deceased fell down from the bullock-cart and
sustained injuries. It appears from the evidence of material witnesses
that there was enmity between the respondent nos. 2 to 15 and
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
6 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
complainant, therefore, all they were made accused. All 14 accused
were alleged to have caused injuries by sticks, sickle, spade and other
deadly weapons. If it had been so, then there should have been much
more injuries on the dead body of deceased. It is clear from the
evidence of Dr. Sarda that only 2-3 injuries were found on the left part
of the body of deceased. The injury nos. 1 and 3 were possible due to
fall from bullock-cart and injury no. 2 is possible due to contact with
iron substance. History stated by complainant himself in Exhibit 55
itself shows that deceased fell down from bullock-cart. All this evidence
clearly show that prosecution has failed to establish that accused/
respondent nos. 2 to 15 beat deceased by deadly weapons like sticks,
stone, spade, sickle etc. Evidence of P.W. 1 not corroborated by medical
evidence. On the other hand, his evidence is falsified by Exhibit 55 in
which he has stated that his father was found fallen from bullock-cart.
As per the medical evidence, injuries were possible due to fall from the
bullock-cart. Learned trial Court rightly considered all the evidence on
record and rightly acquitted the respondent nos. 2 to 15. There is no
merit in the appeal. Hence, appeal is liable to be dismissed. In the
result, we pass the following order.
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:10:36 :::
7 jg.apeal 319.15.odt
ORDER
(i) The appeal is dismissed.
(ii) R & P be sent back to the trial Court.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
