Bombay High Court
Rajenra Namdev Pisal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 13 August, 2024
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
2024:BHC-AS:33692-DB
1/4 43-Ia-1857-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1857 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1858 OF 2024
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 642 OF 2021
Rajendra Namdev Pisal .. Applicant/Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...
Mr. Amit Gharte, for the Applicant/Appellant.
Ms. M. M. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent.
...
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : 13th AUGUST, 2024
P.C:-
1. Interim Application Nos. 1857 of 2024 and 1858 of
2024, filed by the Applicant seek suspension of sentence
imposed on him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Satara, in Sessions Case No. 66 of 2016, wherein he stand
convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and
307 of the Indian Penal Code, and also seeking his release on
bail.
Chaitanya
2/4 43-Ia-1857-2024.doc
2. We have heard the learned counsel Mr. Gharte, for
the Applicant, who is appointed through the High Court Legal
Services Committee, to render assistance to him.
The Appeal is already admitted and since R.&.P.
alongwith paper book is received, the Registry has stated that
it is ready for final hearing.
3. With the able assistance of the learned counsel, we
have perused the impugned Judgment dated 23.08.2019,
which tried the Applicant for offence punishable under
Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC, on the allegation that he
stabbed his own brother Narayan Namdev Pisal, by means of
knife and committed the murder by intentionally or knowingly
causing his death. Similarly, he also assaulted Rohini Bharat
Pisal and Bharat Akoba Pisal by knife and attempted to
murder them.
The prosecution case has unfurled before the
learned Judge through the informant, son of the deceased, as
he categorically deposed that the accused is his father's real
younger brother, whereas Bharat is cousin of the accused and
his cousin uncle.
On 21.10.2015, the members of the family went to
bed and his father Narayan slept in the shed situated in front
of their home. On the next day, when the daily chores began at
around 5.30 a.m., his father for having his bath went into his
house and at around 6.00 a.m. the informant heard his
screams from the bathroom and when he alongwith his mother
rushed, his father came out of the bathroom wearing his
Chaitanya
3/4 43-Ia-1857-2024.doc
clothes, but he was pressing his stomach by his right hand and
the blood was oozing. He saw the accused standing next to his
father with a knife in his hand. The wife of the accused Sunita
was pulling him and upon attempt to intervene the accused
threatened to kill the informant and he then approached the
house of his cousin uncle Bharat with the same knife. After
two to three minutes he could hear loud noises from the house
of his cousin uncle.
On examining his father, he noticed two stab
injuries on the chest, around his navel and even injuries were
sustained by him on his hand. On giving water, his father stood
up but immediately collapsed and became unconscious. He was
taken to the hospital but was declared 'brought dead'.
4. In support of this case of the prosecution, the
prosecution has examined ten witnesses, who have proved the
charge against the accused under Sections 302 and 307 of the
IPC. In addition to PW-1 Ramchandra, even Rohini and Bharat,
the injured are also examined as PW-4 and PW-5.
PW-6 and PW-7 are the Medical Officers who have
thrown light upon the cause of death of the deceased.
5. The learned Sessions Judge on appreciating the
evidence placed before him arrived at a conclusion that in
addition to the informant, PW-4 and PW-5 are the eye
witnesses to the incident and since the prosecution has proved
its case through cogent and reliable evidence of PW-1, PW-4
and PW-5, he arrived at a conclusion that it is only the accused
Chaitanya
4/4 43-Ia-1857-2024.doc
who is responsible for the death of the deceased and the
injuries to PW-4 and PW-5, with an intention to kill them.
On recording the finding of conviction, under
Section 302, he has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for
life and is also directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
seven years on being convicted under Section 307 of the IPC.
The substantive sentences having been directed to
run concurrently.
6. At this stage, on appreciation of evidence, adduced
before the trial Court, we do not think that a case is made for
release of the Applicant on bail or for suspension of the
sentence imposed upon him, as a result thereof, both the
Interim Applications are rejected.
7. We would like to express appreciation for Mr. Amit
Gharte, who was appointed through the High Court Legal
Services Committee for his able assistance.
Let the Legal Services Authority ensure that the
legal remuneration payable to him is disbursed within a period
of six weeks from today.
(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE,J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
CHAITANYA
CHAITANYA ASHOK
ASHOK JADHAV
JADHAV Date:
2024.08.22
17:55:05
+0530
Chaitanya
