Judgment : (V.M. Kanade J.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The Appellant is convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karad for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-and, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 26.3.2002, accused, deceased Pradeep Yadav, Rashid Mulla, Baba Sadashiv Jadhav, PW-1 Shivaji Kadam, Bashir Inamdar, Tanaji Patil, Hanmant Yadav and one Tanjuddin Mulla had gone to attend the obsequial ceremony of one Usmasbhai Mulani. After the programme was over, while they were coming back, the Appellant – Ibrya alias Iqbal suddenly caught hold of the deceased Pradeep's hand and inflicted him 3 to 4 blows by a knife on his chest. At that time, the said deceased Pradeep Yadav started shouted “help help”. The other persons also asked the Appellant to leave the deceased. After the accused released the hand of Pradeep, according to PW-1, the accused rushed towards him with a knife and PW-1 Shivaji Kadam ran away from the place and at that time deceased Pradeep jumped into the canal. According to the Complainant, the Appellant also jumped into the canal and there was a further scuffle between the Appellant and deceased. The knife fell into the water and the Appellant ran away. The witnesses took the deceased to the hospital, however, he succumbed to the injuries and died. 4. On the basis of the said statement of the PW-1 Complainant, FIR was registered. The accused was arrested on 28th March, 2002. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. Chargesheet was filed. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution. 5. The learned counsel for the Appellant-Shri Arfan Sait, who is appointed as an Amicus Curiae to assist this Court has taken us through the judgment and order of the Trial Court and also the evidence adduced by the prosecution. He submitted that the prosecution had not examined Hanmant Yadav and had also not framed charge under section 307 of the IPC against the Appellant, who threatened to assault Hanmant with a knife. He submitted that the prosecution had not examined Hanmant Yadav and had also not framed charge under section 307 of the IPC against the Appellant, who threatened to assault Hanmant with a knife. He also submitted that the Trial Court also had erred in discarding the defence of alibi taken by the Appellant. The Appellant had taken a plea of insanity. It is submitted that the said plea was also wrongly not accepted by the Trial Court. He submitted that the evidence of the eye witnesses viz. PW-1 and PW-9 was not reliable. He further submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is accepted, even then the offence would fall under section 304 Part (II) of the IPC and not under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the Appellant had only inflicted three blows on the deceased. He submitted that there was a sudden fight and prosecution has failed to bring on record the motive behind the assault. He, therefore, submitted that this is a fit case where the offence under section 302 was liable to be altered to offence under section 304 Part (II) of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant was young man of 32 years of age and there were no criminal antecedents and the said incident took place at the spur of moment and it was not a premeditated murder. 6. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State submitted that the prosecution examined two eye witnesses and apart from these two eye witnesses, the prosecution had also examined two other witnesses who had proved the presence of the Appellant at the scene of offence. 7. It is not seriously disputed that the death of the deceased-Pradeep was homicidal. The doctor who had performed the post-mortem, has also stated that the deceased had received four injuries. Out of which, injuries Nos.1,2 3 were fatal. He has stated that the cause of death was due to hemorrhagic shock due to injury to vital organs due to stab injury and injury Nos.2 and 3 were fatal injuries. In his cross examination, PW-10 Dhondiram Dattu Jadhav who performed the post-mortem has stated in paragraph 2 as under. “Injury No.1-Incised stab wound over anterior part of chest over stemum more on left side 9cm. Below medialar border of lt. Clavide, 12 cm. In his cross examination, PW-10 Dhondiram Dattu Jadhav who performed the post-mortem has stated in paragraph 2 as under. “Injury No.1-Incised stab wound over anterior part of chest over stemum more on left side 9cm. Below medialar border of lt. Clavide, 12 cm. Medially from ltd. nipple 13 cm. Medialy from Rt. Nipples elliptical in shape obliquely situated of size 2.5 cm. X 1 cm. X 3 cm. deep directed towards Rt. Side. Upper corner of injury acutely angled. Lower corner less acutely angled than upper one margins of wound cleanly cut bleeding present. Injury No.2-Incised stab wound over abdomen in epigastric region 125 cm. above heel (its lower-end) and 15 cm. below injury No.1 (lower end of injury 1 and upper end of this wound is 15 cm. Oval in shape, oblique situated more on Ltd. side of size 3.5 cm. x 2 cm. x 10 cm. deep. Directed from obliquely upwards towards Rt. Side (right) Upper corner of injury acutely angled. Lower corner was less acutely angled compared to upper one Margins of wound clearly cut, bleeding present, piece of onion present on ornice of upound near upper corner hairs surrounds, adherent to skin. Injury No.3 – Incised stab wound over Right side of abdomen in Rt. hypochondriac-region. It's lower corner is 122 cm. above heel and upper corner 8 cm. Rt. laterally to lover corner of injury No.2, elliptical in shape obliquely situated moreon Rt. side of size. 25 cm. x 1.5 cm. x 6 cm. upper corner of injury acutely angled, lower corner less acutely than upper one. Margins of wound cleanly cut, bleeding present hairs surroundings wound adherent to skin. Injury No.4-minor abrasion on lt. wrist adorsum ulnar side of size 0.5 cm. x 0.5 cm. red in colour. Cause of injury Nos. 1 to 3 is hard and sharp object. Cause of injury No.4 is also hard and blunt object. The age of injury was within 24 hours. These are the external injuries.” The hasdoctor also stated in his opinion that the said injuries were possible by the knife – Article No.7. The prosecution therefore, has clearly established that the death of Pradeep Yadav was homicidal. The prosecution had examined two eye witnesses, PW1 Shivaji Kadam and PW-9 Tanaji Patil. Both these witnesses corroborate each others' testimony in all details. PW-1 has in his evidence mentioned the presence of the PW-9. The prosecution therefore, has clearly established that the death of Pradeep Yadav was homicidal. The prosecution had examined two eye witnesses, PW1 Shivaji Kadam and PW-9 Tanaji Patil. Both these witnesses corroborate each others' testimony in all details. PW-1 has in his evidence mentioned the presence of the PW-9. Similarly, PW-9 also has mentioned about the role of the Appellant in inflicting three injuries on the chest. The presence of the Appellant also has been established by other two witnesses viz. PW-2 Sambhaji Patil and PW-5 Bhashir Inamdar. The prosecution, therefore, has established its case beyond reasonable doubt. 8. The Appellant had taken a defence of alibi. However, he had not examined any witnesses in support of his case of alibi. The Trial Court, in our view, has rightly not accepted the said plea of alibi. 9. In our view, the Trial Court, therefore, was justified in coming to the conclusion that the Appellant was responsible for causing death of Pradeep Yadav and rightly convicted him for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In our view, there is no infirmity or illegality in the judgment and order passed by the Trial court. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. 10. Copy of the judgment to be served on the Appellant through the Superintendent of Jail. The fees of the Amicus Curiae are quantified at Rs.3,500/-.