Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from the judgment and order of sentence dated 13.03.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yavatmal in Sessions Case No.21/2018, convicting the appellants (original accused) of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.50,000/- each, with default simple imprisonment for six months. The case of the prosecution was that on 27.08.2017, due to a dispute over repayment of a hand loan, the accused persons assaulted the deceased Govardhan with an iron rod, fists, kicks and a knife at Datta Chowk vegetable market, Yavatmal, causing injuries that led to his death. The informant, wife of the deceased, stated that the deceased had received a call from accused No.1 in the morning and later went out; in the evening at about 06.30 p.m., the deceased went with his minor son Jay (PW-2) to the vegetable market where the assault took place. PW-2, the sole eyewitness and child witness, returned home and informed his mother about the assault. The deceased was taken to hospital where he was declared dead. The investigation resulted in seizure of a blood-stained iron rod from the spot, blood-stained clothes of accused Nos.1 and 3, and corresponding CA reports. The trial court framed charges under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 read with 149 IPC, examined five prosecution witnesses, and convicted the accused under Section 302/34 IPC. In the appeal before the High Court, the appellants contended that the FIR and informant's evidence were hearsay; the sole eyewitness was a child, his statement was recorded after 15 days without explanation, and the medical evidence did not support the allegation of knife injuries; no independent witnesses were examined despite the incident occurring on a public road; hence the conviction was unsustainable. The State countered that the child witness was natural and knew the accused, the blood-stained weapon and clothes connected the accused, and the circumstantial evidence corroborated the ocular account. The High Court heard oral and written submissions, reserved judgment on 17.07.2026 and pronounced it on 03.08.2026. The operative portion of the judgment was not included in the provided text.
Issue of Consideration
1. Whether the evidence of child witness (PW-2) was reliable and corroborated? 2. Whether the non-examination of independent witnesses and delayed recording of statement vitiated the prosecution case? 3. Whether the medical evidence contradicted the ocular account regarding use of knife? 4. Whether the circumstantial evidence (blood-stained clothes) was sufficient to sustain conviction?
