Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. On committal, trial Court framed charge against the accused vide Exh.9. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of accused was of total denial and false implication. He raised a specific defence that Suresh and his father were prosecuted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with the murder of one Govinda Dhole. Suresh and one Shriram Masurkar were facing prosecution on 5 Apeal546-03.odt the allegations of committing rape and murder of one Indubai Darunkar and father of the accused was a witness for prosecution in the said matter. According to the accused, due to previous animosity he has been falsely involved in the present case.

5. Prosecution examined in all seven witnesses to support its case. Trial Court relied upon the evidence of PW1 injured Suresh, though disbelieved evidence of child witness PW2 Seema daughter of PW1. It is stated by complainant Suresh that on the day of incident i.e. 29.09.2000 at about 10 a.m. he was present in front of the door of his house. The evidence of Suresh shows that idol of Goddess Durga was installed and near the pendol where idol was installed, drainage water from the house of the accused was flowing which could reach near the pendol. He, therefore, stopped the flow of water and that time accused coming from behind, dealt a blow of an axe on his head and second blow on his left thigh. He stated that he rushed to the house of Sudhakar Narad. Accused chased him upto the residence of Narad. Sudhakar Narad scolded the accused and then he returned back. In the cross-examination, some important admissions could be elicited by the defence. He admits that when axe was seized 6 Apeal546-03.odt and it was shown to Police, it was not got identified. He admitted that he and his father have been prosecuted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegations of committing murder of Govinda Dhole. He also admits that he and Shriram Masurkar were facing prosecution on the alleged commission of rape and committing murder of Indubai Darunkar. He further admits that father of accused was examined as a prosecution witness in Indubai's case. Though complainant denies that he had beaten brother of the accused and, therefore, accused felt that he would beat him and so the incident occurred contradiction in the statement recorded by Executive Magistrate 'A' has been proved by the defence.