1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.133 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra ..Appellant V/s. Govind Barik Gunaware & anr. ..Respondents Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, A.P.P, for the State None for the respondents CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & K.U.CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE : 17TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. . The Criminal Appeal is moved by the State for enhancement of sentence awarded by the impugned Judgment and Order dated 29th September, 2007 by the learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge-I, Baramati, District Pune in Session Case No.8 of 2005. 2. The learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge found accused No.1 Govind Gunaware and accused No.2 Parashuram Gunaware guilty 2 for the offence punishable under Section 304(2) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each in default of payment of fine, each accused to suffer further R.I. for 30 days. While the original accused No.2 was convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three months and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine accused to suffer R.I. for 15 days. The accused No.3 Ambadas Gunaware and accused No.4 Raghunath Gunaware were acquitted of the charge of the offence punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The complainant Rausaheb is nephew of accused No.1 Govind Gunaware and accused No.4 Raghunath Gunaware. As deceased Subrao was real brother, there was dispute between father of the complainant, Subrao on one hand and accused Nos.1 and 4 on the other in respect of Block No.104-A which was pending since last 30 years. The parties had Civil suits pending. 3 4. On 1st September, 2004 at about 3.00 P.M., Krishna was weeding out grass in the crop of sugarcane. Subrao was watering crop of onion in his land. Accused No.2 was also working in his field. He threw bushes in the field of complainant which was objected by complainant's father and this started assaulting father of complainant Krishna by handle of pick axe. Accused No.2 then went away and called his father Govind (Accused No.1). Both of them were armed with stick. They started assaulting Subrao on his head and back. Subrao raised shouts for help. The complainant was not allowed to rescue Subrao and accused Nos.3 and 4 held him and accused Nos.1 and 2 assaulted Subrao mercilessly. On 6th September, 2004 Subrao succumbed to the injuries. Role attributed to the accused Nos.3 and 4 is that they did not allow the complainant to intervene. 5. On the basis of internal as well as external injuries Dr.Chandekar has opined that Subrao died due to intra-cerebral and intra-cranial blood with injury. He also opined that evidence of 4 hypertensive heart disease was present. The learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge has observed that the incident of assault at Krishna by accused No.2 Parashuram Gunaware is proved. The learned Ad- hoc Sessions Judge on analysis of evidence noticed that there was no act of instigation of any stretch of imagination against accused No.3 Ambadas Gunaware and P.W.4 Raghunath Gunaware. The accused Nos.1 and 2 had knowledge that act done by them may likely to cause death of Subrao. The blow of stick was given on the vital part of the body and consequently, the accused had knowledge that the act of assault may cause death of Subrao. Consequently, the learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge has rightly convicted the accused under Section 304(2) of the Indian Penal Code. In the above state of facts, we do not find any wrong on the part of the learned Ad-hoc Sessions Judge. Hence, no interference is required. Leave to enhancement of sentence is rejected. (F.I.REBELLO, J.) 5 (K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.)