Bombay High Court
Suman Bhikaji Mali And Ors vs State Of Mah on 23 October, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:26119
-1- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 356 OF 2005
1. Suman W/o. Bhikaji Mali,
Age : 46 years, Occu. : Service,
R/o. P.H.C. Katneshwar, Tq. Purna,
Dist. Parbhani.
2. Nirmalbai W/o. Shivlal Thakare,
Age : 29 years, Occu. : Labourer,
R/o. Near Khanapur Naka, Parbhani.
3. Shivlal S/o. Kashiram Thakare,
Age : 31 years, Occu. : Labourer,
R/o. Near Khanapur Naka, Parbhani. ... Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
...
Mr. S. D. Hiwrekar, Advocate for Appellants.
Mr. K. K. Naik, APP for Respondent - State.
...
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
RESERVED ON : 14 OCTOBER 2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 23 OCTOBER 2024
JUDGMENT :
1. In this appeal, there is challenge to judgment and order
dated 23.05.2005 passed by 1st Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge,
Parbhani in Sessions Trial No.132 of 2005 recording guilt of the
appellants for offence punishable under section 323 read with
section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
-2- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
2. In brief case of prosecution in trial court is that,
daughter of informant Ramprasad was suffering from Diarrhea
and vomiting. Therefore, on 05.05.2000 at about 7:00 p.m., he
visited Primary Health Center, Yerandeshwar to collect medicine.
Accused no.1 refused to give medicine. Accused no.3, who was
under influence of liquor as well as accused nos.1 and 2 mounted
assault by means of sticks as well as fist and kick blows. Informant
PW1 Ramprasad was admitted in hospital and there on his
statement, crime Exh.16 was registered.
After being charge-sheeted and tried by learned 1 st Ad-
hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani, guilt of appellants was
held to be proved. Hence the instant appeal.
SUBMISSIONS
On behalf of Appellants :-
3. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that, there is
false implication. That, there are cross complainants. That, there
is no independent and convincing evidence. That, there is no
seizure of any articles. That, there is only evidence of informant
and there is no corroboration from independent corner. It is
pointed out that, learned trial Judge has accepted the prosecution
version as proved. That, there is improper appreciation of
evidence. That, answers in the cross-examination are not
-3- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
appreciated, and therefore, learned counsel prays to allow the
appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment.
On behalf of Respondent - State :
4. On the other hand, learned APP submitted that, injured
was assaulted by appellants by means of stick, kicks and fist blows.
That, he was required to be admitted due to injuries. That, police
recorded his statement while he was undergoing treatment. That,
medical expert confirms injury by examining PW2 Gangadhar is an
independent witness. Therefore, as there is convincing evidence,
learned APP submitted that, learned trial Judge has correctly
recorded the guilt and he prays to dismiss the appeal.
EVIDENCE ON RECORD
5. Prosecution case is rested on in all four witnesses, i.e.
PW1 Ramprasad, informant; PW2 Gangadhar, independent
witness; PW3 Dr. Pandit, Medical expert and PW4 ASI Gajbhar,
Investigating Officer.
6. On appreciating the evidence of informant PW1
Ramprasad at Exh.15, he seems to have deposed that on
05.05.2000, he went to P.H.C. Yerandeshwar to collect medicine
for his ailing daughter. He has deposed that he approached accused
no.1 and demanded the medicine, but she refused to give and then
-4- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
he testified that he was beaten by accused no.1 and accused no.3,
who was in a drunken state by means of stick on his head, shoulder
and leg and he fell down. Then, he alleged blows showered by
accused nos.1 and 2. He deposed about his statement recorded in
hospital while undergoing treatment.
While under cross, he has stated that, house of accused
and hospital are in the same building. He answered that, he did not
take his daughter. He answered that there was no previous quarrel
with accused. He answered that on 8:00 p.m. he was unconscious
in his home. He is unable state whether there was any doctor on
duty. He answered that he identified voice of Dnyanoba and
Gangadhar. He answered that, while he was hospitalized, police
came there. Rest is all denial.
7. Again witness was called by virtue of order passed by
trial Judge on Exh.29 and this time he stated that he was beaten
by stick due to which he sustained injuries on head and below the
eyes. His clothes were blood stained, but police did not seize it.
8. PW2 Gangadhar in evidence at Exh.17 stated that, on
05.05.2000 at about 7:00 p.m. while he was returning from temple,
he saw quarrel between accused and complainant and then
accused no.1 was beating complainant, whereas daughter and son-
-5- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
in-law of accused no.1 were also beating complainant. He
intervened and separated them. He and Dnyanoba took
complainant in his house. He identified accused in the court.
While under cross he stated that, there was commotion
in front of house of accused no.1 and in front of it there is temple.
He again stated that accused nos.1 to 3 were beating complainant
and he also questioned them for beating. At that time complainant
had fallen unconscious.
9. PW3 Dr. Pandit, deposed about noticing following
injuries on the person of informant Ramprasad :-
"1. C.L.W. size 3x1 cm. occipital region, caused by hard and
blunt object.
2. Abrasion 2x1 cm. on left cubital fossa.
3. Abrasion 1x1 cm. on right forearm.
4. Abrasion 2x1 cm. on right shoulder.
5. Abrasion 2x1 cm. on right lion."
According to him, the injuries were within 12 hours.
He was admitted and discharged on 10.05.2000. He identified
injury certificate at Exh.25.
10. Fourth witness PW4 ASI Gajbhar is the Investigating
Officer.
-6- Cri.Appeal.356.2005
ANALYSIS
11. On complete appreciation of evidence of informant, his
version is that, he went to P.H.C. and demanded medicine for his
daughter and accused no.1 refused to give and moreover she, her
daughter and son-in-law beat complainant, has not been shaken.
By way of re-examination, prosecution has brought on record that
beating was by means of fist and kicks blows. PW2 Gangadhar, who
has intervened and separated, is an independent witness and he
has corroborated complainant's version. PW3 Dr. Pandit confirms
examination and admission and noticing injuries on the person of
complainant. Testimonies of PW2 Gangadhar and PW3 Dr. Pandit
have also remained unshaken. Consequently, offence under section
324 of IPC is apparently made out.
12. Perused the judgment under challenge. Findings are in
consonance with the evidence, there is no infirmity or perversity
so as to interfere. Hence appeal deserves to be dismissed.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order :-
ORDER
The criminal appeal stands dismissed.
(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)
Tandale
