JUDGMENT : Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. 1. This appeal is directed by the appellant-original accused against the Judgment and Order dated 21.08.2006 passed by the learned 2nd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gr. Bombay at Sewree in Sessions Case No. 738 of 2005. By the said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of his wife Maria. The appellant was again convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of sister-in-law Juliana. For each of the offences, the appellant was sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- i.d. R.I. for six months. The learned Sessions Judge directed that both the substantive sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under: (i) The complainant P.W. 1 Wilfred was residing at Ganesh Murthi Nagar, Cuff Parade, Colaba, Mumbai. He was residing there alongwith his family members including his wife Juliana (deceased). He had two sisters, one of them was Maria (deceased). The appellant was married to Maria(deceased). The appellant was working as a waiter. Prior to one month of the incident, he left his job. The appellant was in the habit of drinking liquor and he remained unemployed. The accused used to sell household articles to purchase liquor. His wife Maria i.e. sister of the complainant was working as a maid servant. The appellant as well as Maria were residing in the house of the complainant. The appellant used to constantly quarrel with his wife Maria. On account of behaviour of the appellant, the complainant threw him out of the house. Whereupon the appellant threatened the complainant that he will kill the complainant, wife of complainant i.e. Juliana and sister of the complainant Maria i.e. wife of the appellant. (ii) On 14/6/2005 the appellant assaulted his wife Maria as well as his sister-in-law Juliana with a big knife in the house. Both of them ran out of the house towards STD booth run by P.W. 5 Swami. The appellant followed Maria and Juliana and again assaulted them near STD booth of P.W. 5 Swami. This was witnessed by P.W. 5 Swami as well as P.W. 8 Annie Leao. Both these witnesses knew the appellant as well as the deceased. Both of them ran out of the house towards STD booth run by P.W. 5 Swami. The appellant followed Maria and Juliana and again assaulted them near STD booth of P.W. 5 Swami. This was witnessed by P.W. 5 Swami as well as P.W. 8 Annie Leao. Both these witnesses knew the appellant as well as the deceased. FIR was lodged by P.W. 1 Wilfred who was the brother of Maria and the husband of Juliana. Thereafter investigation commenced. (iii) The dead bodies of Maria and Juliana were sent for post mortem. P.W. 13 Dr. Shinde performed the post mortem on the dead bodies of Maria and Juliana. As far as Maria is concerned, he noticed following external injuries : (1) Incised stab wound on the abdomen front epigastric area just below xiphistemum oblique 9.5 cm. x 2 cm. x cavity deep left lower angle obtused and right upper angle acute. (2) Incised stab wound on the right side abdomen laterally mid armpit line 19 cm below axilla lower front angle obtused upper lateral angle acute. (3) Incised wound on the right side face or right zygomatic area 2 cm x 0.5 cm. x muscle deep. (4) Surgical stitched wound on left cubital fossa front, transverse five stitches intact 2.5 cm. length (venesection) (5) Injection mark both hand back and right cubital fossa. According to the Doctor all the above injuries are antemortem. On further dissection of external injuries the corresponding internal injuries are as follows : (3) Corresponding with ext. injuries No. 1 – Perforated skin, muscles, peritoneum underneath cut 7th rib costal cartilage right side chest 2 cm. length. – Perforated diaphragm. – Perforated right lobe of liver through and through. – Entry 5 cm x 1 cm. Exit on back 4 cm x 0.5 cm depth – Direction front to back, medial to lateral depth 17 to 18 cm. of liver injury 14 cm. (2) Corresponding with external injury No. 2 – Perforated skin, muscle, peritoneum underneath. – Perforated Ascending Colon through & through entry 4 cm x 1 cm exit 3 cm x 0.8 cm. (3 cm x 0.8 cm) – Perforated ileac coil 70 cm from ileocaecal junction with mesentery through and through entry 2.5 cm x 0.5 cm. Exit 2 cm x 0.5 cm. with cut mesentoric vessels and nerves. – Perforated Ascending Colon through & through entry 4 cm x 1 cm exit 3 cm x 0.8 cm. (3 cm x 0.8 cm) – Perforated ileac coil 70 cm from ileocaecal junction with mesentery through and through entry 2.5 cm x 0.5 cm. Exit 2 cm x 0.5 cm. with cut mesentoric vessels and nerves. – Direction above downwards and medially depth 15 to 16 cm(15 to 16 cm.) According to Dr. Shinde the cause of death of Maria was haemorthage and shock due to incised stab wound on abdomen involving vital organ (unnatural). As far as Juliana is concerned, following injuries were noticed on her person : (1) Surgical stitched wound on the abdomen from vertical, epigastric to below umbilicus right paramediam, length 22 cms, 20 stitches, stitches Intact. (2) Surgical stitched wound on the left side abdomen on ant. Armpit line, 21 cm. below left axcilla, oblique, 8.5 cm length, seven stitches, stitches intact. (3) I.C.D. (Intercostal drainage) wound on left side chest mid armpit line long lateral surgical stitches 1.5 cm (4) Surgical colostomy wound on the right side abdomen front upper part 3.5 cm from midline, 2.8 cm x 1.5 cm. patent (5) Surgical drainage wounds on the (a) right side abdomen ant. armpit line 13.0 cm. from midline, iliac fossa, 2.0 cm x 0.5 cm. (b) left side abdomen ant. Armpit line 12.5 cm from midline, pelvic fossa, 2.0 cm x 0.5 cm (6) Surgical stitched wound on left wrist back laterally, 6.5 cm length, oblique, seven stitches, intact. (7) Surgical stitched wound on the right hand back bare of thumb, 3.5 cm length, 4 stitches, intact. (8) One surgical stitched wound on right side neck 4.0 cm. from midline. (9) Injection mark on right and left cubital fossa and right hand back. In the opinion of Dr. Shinde, Juliana died due to hypovoluemic shock due to massive haemorrhages due to stab injury (unnatural). (iv) The appellant came to be arrested. After completion of investigation, the chargesheet came to be filed. In due course the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. 3. Charge came to be framed against the accused/appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for causing death of his wife Maria and again under Section 302 for causing death of Juliana, wife of complainant Wilfred. The accused/appellant pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. 3. Charge came to be framed against the accused/appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for causing death of his wife Maria and again under Section 302 for causing death of Juliana, wife of complainant Wilfred. The accused/appellant pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. His defence is that of total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated in Para 1 above, hence, this Appeal. 4. We have heard the learned Advocate appointed for the appellant and the learned APP for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gr. Bombay at Sewree and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that the appellant assaulted his wife Maria as well as her sister-in-law Juliana with knife and caused their death. 5. The conviction is mainly based on the evidence of two eye-witnesses i.e. P.W. 5 Swami and P.W. 8 Annie Leao. P.W. 5 Swami has stated that he was residing at Ganesh Murti Nagar, Cuff Parade, Mumbai. He knew deceased Maria who was the wife of the appellant. He also knew the complainant as well as the appellant. He knew them well as they were his neighbours. This witness has stated that the appellant was unemployed at the time of incident. The accused was addicted to liquor and he used to sell household articles to purchase liquor. The appellant used to quarrel with his wife Maria. This witness has stated that he runs a STD booth. On 14/6/2005 when he was at his STD booth at about 9.45 a.m. Maria who sustained bleeding injuries came in front of his STD booth. The appellant was following her. He was holding a big knife in his hand. This witness i.e. P.W. 5 Swami came out of the STD booth to save Maria and hold her and help her. While he was catching Maria, the appellant came there and assaulted Maria on the stomach with knife. Juliana also came there and fell down. She had also sustained bleeding injuries on her person. The appellant then assaulted Juliana with the knife. While he was catching Maria, the appellant came there and assaulted Maria on the stomach with knife. Juliana also came there and fell down. She had also sustained bleeding injuries on her person. The appellant then assaulted Juliana with the knife. P.W. 5 Swami intervened and caught the appellant. This witness called the police. Police came to the spot. Then this witness handed over the appellant and the knife to the police. This witness has identified the knife Article B as well as the appellant before the Court. This witness has further stated that when he asked the appellant why he has assaulted his wife Maria and Juliana, the appellant told him that he assaulted his wife Maria and Juliana, as they had both quarreled with him. 6. The second eye-witness in this case is P.W. 8 Annie Leao. She has stated that Juliana was her friend. She knew Maria as well as Maria's husband Tony i.e. the appellant. This witness was also residing in Ganesh Murti Nagar, Colaba where the appellant and the deceased were residing. Annie Leao has stated that the appellant was unemployed. He was not doing any work or job. He used to sell household articles. The appellant also used to quarrel with Juliana. Therefore, his wife Maria had thrown him out from the house. Hence, the appellant became angry. P.W. 8 Annie Leao has stated that on 14/6/2005 at about 9.40 a.m. she came out of her house to purchase grocery articles. While she was going towards the grocery shop, she heard the sound of Juliana from her residence to save her. At that time, injured Maria came out of the residence. Annie Leao saw that Maria had sustained injuries on her person and Maria started running towards STD booth of P.W. 5 Swami. Immediately the appellant also came out of the residence with a knife. Injured Juliana also came out of the house. Juliana who was injured prevented the appellant, who was going towards injured Maria. Hence, the appellant assaulted Juliana with knife and immediately rushed towards Maria. Thus evidence of two eye-witnesses i.e. P.W. 5 Swami and P.W. 8 Annie Leao shows that the appellant assaulted both Maria and Juliana with a knife. 7. Besides the evidence of the above two eye-witnesses, the prosecution is relying on the oral dying declaration made by Juliana to P.W. 3 Sarswati and P.W. 11 Austin. Thus evidence of two eye-witnesses i.e. P.W. 5 Swami and P.W. 8 Annie Leao shows that the appellant assaulted both Maria and Juliana with a knife. 7. Besides the evidence of the above two eye-witnesses, the prosecution is relying on the oral dying declaration made by Juliana to P.W. 3 Sarswati and P.W. 11 Austin. P.W. 3 Sarswati has stated that she was residing at Ganesh Murti Nagar, Cuff Parade, Mumbai. On 14/6/2005 she left her residence in order to join her duty. She saw crowd of people on the way. She saw that Juliana whom she knew had sustained injuries and was shouting to save her. At that time Austin P.W. 11 was going by the road. P.W. 11 Austin with the help of P.W. 3 Sarswati took the injured Juliana to Saint George Hospital where she was admitted. On the way to hospital, P.W. 3 Sarswati asked injured Juliana as to who assaulted her and injured Juliana told her that the appellant assaulted her and his wife Maria with knife. The evidence of P.W. 11 Austin is on the same lines as that of P.W. 3 Sarswati. 8. One other circumstance against the appellant is that he made an extra judicial confession to P.W. 5 Swami. Swami has deposed that immediately after the incident Swami asked the appellant why he assaulted Maria and Juliana, whereupon the appellant told him that he assaulted them as they had quarreled with him. 9. In addition to the above evidence, the prosecution is relying on the circumstance of seizure of blood stained clothes which were on the person of the appellant and seizure of bloodstained knife which was in the hand of the appellant at the time of the incident. P.W. 4 panch witness Shaikh has stated that he was in front of STD Center at Ganesh Murthi Nagar. At that time he saw the appellant present there. The clothes of the appellant were stained with blood and there was knife in his hand. Knife came to be seized by the police which was wrapped and sealed. Panchanama in relation to the seizure of blood-stained knife is at Exh. 18. Blood-stained clothes which were on the person of the appellant also came to be seized vide pachanama Exh. 44. Knife came to be seized by the police which was wrapped and sealed. Panchanama in relation to the seizure of blood-stained knife is at Exh. 18. Blood-stained clothes which were on the person of the appellant also came to be seized vide pachanama Exh. 44. The clothes and knife were sent to CA and as per the CA report the clothes of the appellant and knife were found stained with blood of 'B' group. The clothes of Maria and Juliana were also stained with blood of 'B' group. This shows that the blood-group of the deceased was found on the clothes of the appellant as well as knife. 10. The motive for the incident has also been brought on record by the prosecution through the evidence of P.W. 1 Wilfred who has stated that his sister Maria was married to the appellant. The appellant had left his job and he was in the habit of drinking liquor. The appellant used to sell household articles to purchase liquor. The appellant and his wife Maria were residing with the complainant and his wife Juliana. On account of the behaviour of the appellant, the complainant threw the appellant out of the house. Therefore, the appellant became angry and he threatened the complainant that he would kill him, Juliana wife of complainant and Maria, sister of the complainant i.e. wife of the appellant. 11. Looking to all the evidence on record, we find that prosecution has proved that the appellant caused the murder of Maria as well as Juliana. Hence we find no merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed. 12. Office to communicate this order to the Superintendent of prison where the appellant is lodged and to the appellant-original accused. Writ of order is expedited. 13 At this stage, we must record our appreciation for Smt. B.P.Jakhade, Advocate appointed from High Court Legal Services Committee, Bombay to represent the appellant. We found that she has very ably argued the matter. We quantify legal fees to be paid to her by the High Court Legal Services Committee at Rs. 2500/-. The said fees be paid to Advocate Smt. B.P. Jakhade within three months from today.