SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                            [2017) 8 S.C.R. 537


                   SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE                               A
                                    v.
                      STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                     (Crimina!Appea!No.1962 of2011)
~
                            AUGUST 03, 2017                              B

                 [A.K. SIKRI AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.)
            Penal Code, 1860 - ss.143, 147, 148, 302 rlw s.149 and s.326
    rlw. s.149 - Deceased beaten to death by appellants owing to a
    long standing dispute - Concurrent conviction of appellants by
     Courts below - Plea of appellants that one of the prosecution witness
                                                                           c
     (PW-8) stated that he ate 'Bhel' with deceased immediately before
     the incident however. said fact of eating 'Bhel' by deceased had not
     come up in his post mortem examination which casts a doubt on the
     narration of the whole incident by the witness, thus the same was a
     result of afterthought - On appeal, held: Evidence of a medical D
     person is merely an opinion which lends corroboration to the direct
     evidence in the case - On a careful perusal of the post mortem
     conducted by PW-10 (doctor), it is clear that the death was caused
    .by means of a sharp edged weapon- possibly a sword - Evidence
     given by PW-10 fully corroborates with the version given by PW-5
                                                                           E
      and PW-8 that the appellants caused the death of the deceased
     .using swords and iron pipes - Since, the eye witnesses' account
      was found credible and trustworthy, medical opinion pointing to
      alternative possibilities cannot be accepted as conclusive - No
      infirmity in orders passed by High Court with regard to conviction
      and sentence of the appellants-accused.                              F
          Medical jurisprudence - Alleged uncertainty w.r.t. time of
    occurrence as well as death of the deceased - Plea of appellants
    that PW;8 s version that he ate 'Bhe/' v/ith the deceased before the
    incident was falsified, as according to the medical evidence there
    were no food particles in the stomach of the deceased - Held: G
    Judging the time of death from the contents of the stomach, may not
    always be the determinative test - It will require due corroboration
    from other evidence - Plea with regard to absence offood particles
    in the intestine of the deceased has no basis as digestion varies
                                                                          H
                                    537
538          SUPREME COURT REPORTS                     (2017] 8 S.C.R.


A from person to person, and sometimes even with the same person at
   different times - Further, if prosecution is able to prove its case,
   including the time of death, and the same points towards the guilt of
   the accused, then it may not be appropriate for the Court to wholly
 ' reject the case of prosecution and to determine the time of death
B with reference to the stomach contents of the deceased.
           Evidence:
           Medical Witness - Opinion of - Evidentiary value of -
      Discussed.
           Dismissing the appeal, the Court
c
         HELD: 1.1 In the instant case, on a careful perusal of the
  post mortem conducted by PW-10, it is very much clear that the
  death is caused by means of a sharp edged weapon and that too
  possibly by means of sword. The evidence given by PW-10 fully
  corroborates with the version given by PW-5 and PW-8 that the
D appellants caused the death of the deceased using swords and
  iron pipes. It has been specifically mentioned in the report that
  injuries could be possible by various blows of the weapons.
  Further, the death was caused due to cardio respiratory arrest
  due to hemorrhage as well as neurogenic shock due to very
E extensive lacerated wound over face including brain along with
  multiple bone fractures on face. The evidence of a medical person
  is merely an opinion which lends corroboration to the direct
  evidence in the case. It has been observed in various cases of
  tlris Court that where the eye witnesses' account is found credible
  and trustworthy, medical opinion pointing to alternative
F possibilities is not accepted as conclusive. [Para 71 [545-E-H)
         2.1 Further, the presence or absence of food at the time of
   post-mortem in relation to the time of death is based on various
   factors and circumstances such as the typ!! and nature of the food
   consumed, the time of taking the meal, the age of the person
 G concerned and power and capacity of the person to digest the
   food. In the present case, though PW-8 has stated that he had
   'Bhel' with the deceased just before the incident, there is no
   evidence about the exact time when the meals were taken or the
   quantity of 'Bhel' consumed by the deceased. Judging the time
 H
        SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                           539
                   MAHARASHTRA

of death from the contents of the stomach, may not always be the A
determinative test. It will require due corroboratio,n from other
evidence. If the prosecution is able to prove its case beyond
 reasonable doubt and cumulatively, the evidence of the
 prosecution, including the time of death, is proved beyond
 reasonable doubt and the same points towards the guilt of the B
 accused, then it may not be appropriate for the .court to wholly
 reject the case of the prosecution and to determine the time of
 death with reference to the stomach contents of the deceased.
 Where there is positive direct evidence about the time of
·Occurrence, it is not open to the court to speculate about the
 time of occurrence by the presence of faecal matter in the C
 intestine. The question of time of death of the victim should not
 be decided only by taking into consideration the state of food in
 the stomach. That may be a factor which should be considered
 along with other evidence, but that fact alone cannot be decisive.
 (Para 9) (546-D-F, H ; 547-A-B)
                                                                      D
       2.2 Medical opinion is admissible in evidence like all other
-types of evidence and there is no hard-and-fast rule with regard
 to appreciation of medical evidence. It is not to be treated as
 sacrosanct in its absolute terms. So far as ti.e food contents are
 concerned, they remain for long hours in the stomach and the
 duration thereof depends upon various other factors. [Para 10(       E
 [547-B-C)
       Modi s book on Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology -
 relied on.
      · 2.3 It is clear from the depositions of the prosecution F
 witnesses, viz., PW-5 and PW-8 which corroborates with the
 deposition of PW-10 that the injuries were sustained by a sharp
 cutting object and not by hard and blunt object. Further, the plea
 raised by the appellants with regard to non-founding of food
 particles in the intestine of the deceased is of no basis as the
 digestion varies with different person even with same material, G
 and sometimes even with the same person at different times.
 With incomplete digestion, no reliable opinion can be given on a
 medical basis. In fact, there is no positive evidence that the
 deceased had 'Bhel' along with others. If the period of digestion
                                                                      H
540            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2017] 8 S.C.R.


A     is six hours, the food will be in semi-digested stage upto 2 to 2Vz
      hours and if someone takes food then it remains in stomach for
      half an hour and then it goes to the intestine. Even if it be taken
      that the deceased had 'Bhel' along with others and five minutes
      thereafter the incident started in which he succumbed to his
B     injuries, the food will not be converted into semi-digested state
      and the doctor will not find any food particles in the intestine.
      The digestion of food is one of the important data which guide
      the medical officer in arriving at an opinion as to the time of death.
      This is possible on internal examination. [Para 12) [547-E-HJ
         2.4 The evidence of PWs 5, 8 and 12 are found to be
C trustworthy and fully corroborated with each other on the point
  o( alleged incident with regard to the involvement of the
  appellants. Further, their evidence fully corroborates with the
  medical evidence given by the Doctor who conducted the post
  mortem of the deceased. The evidence of the witnesses cannot
D be brushed aside merely because of some minor contradictions,
  if any, particularly for the reason that the evidence and testimonies
  of the witnesses are trustworthy. [Para 14) [548-C-D)
            Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Sukumar Mukherjee AIR
            2010 SC 1162 : [2009) 13 SCR 1 - relied on.
 E                            Case Law Reference
      [2009) 13 SCR 1                  relied on                  Para 11
            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
      No. 1962 of201 I.
 F         From the Judgment and Order dated I I.0 I .20 I I of the High Court
      of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No. 246 of 2009.
                                       WITH
            Crl. A. No. 604 of2012.
 G           Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Vatsalya Vigya, Rajat Kapoor, Advs.
      for the Appellant.
           Mahaling Pandarge, Addi. Govt. Adv., Nishant Ramakantrao
      Katneshwarkar, Adv. for the Respondent.

 H
         SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                               541
                    MAHARASHTRA

      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by                           A
       R.K. AGRAWAL, J. l. The above appeals have been filed
against the common judgment and order dated 11.0 l.2011 passed by the
High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Criminal
Appeal Nos. 246 and 250 of2009 whereby the Division Bench of the
High Court confirmed the order of conviction and sentence dated B
09.04.2009 passed by the Court of Sessions, Ahmednagar in Sessions
Case No. 88 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 143,
14 7, 148, 302 read with Section 149 and Section 326 read with Section
149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC').
      2. Brief facts:                                                      c
       (a) It is the case of the prosecution that on the fateful evening of
-31.01.2008, Ravindra Kale (since deceased) was beaten to death by the
 appellants herein and others, who were 12 (twelve) in numbers and
were armed with swords and iron pipes, owing to a long standing dispute
 between the deceased and the accused persons.                              D
       (b) Shaila Kale (PW-12)-wife of the deceased, filed a complaint
 with regard to the alleged crime which got registered as Crime No. 14
 of 2008 against the accused persons. After investigation, the charges
 were framed and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and
 numbered as Sessions Case No. 88 of 2008.                                  E
        (c) Vide judgment and order dated 09.04.2009, the Court of
Sessions, Ahmednagar, convicted the appellants herein, viz., Pandurang
Shridhar Wadane and Sanjay Khanderao Wadane along with others under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 302read with Section 149, Section326 read with
Sectfon 149 of the IPC and sentenced to rigor9us imprisonment (RI) for F
life along with fine.
      (d) Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 09.04.2009, the
appeilants herein, along with others, preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.
246 and 250 of2009 before the High Court. A Division Bench of the
High Court, vide common judgment and order dated 11.01.2011, confirmed G
the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of Sessions
against the appellants herein.     ·
       (e) Being aggrieved by the order dated 11.0l.2011, the appellants
 have preferred these appeals by way of special leave before this Court.
                                                                           H
542             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                            [2017] 8 S.C.R.


A           3. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the
      records.
             4. The alleged incident is said to have occurred on 31.01.2008 at
      about 5:00 p.m. There was some dispute between the deceased and the
      accused persons and earlier also there were incidents of scuffle between
B     the parties. On the date of the incident, the deceased was standing in
      front of a tea stall in his village. Anil Kale (PW-5), brother of the deceased
      was also present there. Suddenly, the appellants herein, along with other
      accused persons, came to the spot in a car and 2 motorcycles. The car
      gave a hit to the deceased due to which he fell down. Immediately
      thereafter, the accused persons, along with others, started beating him
 C    with swords and iron pipes. Anil Kale (PW-5), who was present at the
      spot and is an eye-witness to the incident, immediately rushed to call the
      wife of the deceased who was working nearby. When the wife of the
      deceased reached the spot, she also witnessed that the accused persons,
      afong with others, were beating her husband. Sunil Raosaheb Kale
 D    (PW-8), Devdas Magar and Shridhar Salve were also present at the
      spot and also sustained injuries while rescuing the deceased. The
      information of the said incident was given by Anil Kale to the police over
      phone and the deceased was shifted to the Hospital where he was
      declared brought dead. The charges were framed against the accused
      persons under various Sections of the IPC including Section 302 read
 E    with Section 149 and were later on confirmed by the Sessions Court and
       the High Court against them. Since a common question of law has
       arisen in these appeals, the same will be disposed of by way of this
       common judgment.
          5. For a better appreciation of the matter, it is pertinent to throw
 F light upon the versions of the prosecution witnesses. Since in the present
   set of appeals only the appellants herein are before us, we are confining
   our discussion to them only. There is no doubt that the death was
   homicidal. Anil Kale-real brother of the deceased, who was examined
   as· PW-5, very categorically narrated the whole incident as to how the
 G accused persons reached the spot in a Van and motorcycles. Further,
   the appellants herein got down from the car and were armed with swords
   and others were armed with iron pipes. One Sambhaji Aher gave two
   blows on the head of the deceased using sword. On seeing this, he
   rushed to call Shaila Kale (PW-12) - wife of the deceased, who was

 H
         SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                                543
            MAHARASHTRA [R.K. AGRAWAL, J.]

working near to the place of the incident. On his return, he witnessed A
that the accused persons were beating his brother using swords and iron
pipes: He also witnessed that Sunil Kale, Devdas Magar and Shridhar
Salve also got injuries while rescuing the brother of the deceased. Anil
Kale made a phone to the police station informing about the incident.
This witness further deposed that there was long standing rivalry between B
the parties. Anil Kale had seen the accused persons while causing injury
on the head of his brother by means of swords and iron pipes. His
evidence clearly shows that he had seen Sambhaji Aher giving two blows
on the head of the deceased and had also seen the appellants herein
causing injury on the person of the deceased. He also witnessed the
injuries caused to Sunil Kale (PW-8) and Shridhar Salve during the said C
incident. Though the High Court has discarded the testimony of this
prosecution witness, on a perusal of the examination and cross
examination of this witness, we are of the opinion that he has narrated
 the incident exceptionally well and contradictions, if any, are so minor in
_nature that it does not go to the root of the matter.
                                                                              D
         6. Sunil Raosaheb Kale - cousin brother of the deceased was
 examined as PW-8. He deposed before the Court that the accused
 persons reached the spot in a Van and on two motorcycles. The
 appellants herein got down from the Car and were armed with swords.
 First blow was given by Sambhaji Aher using sword on the head and
 second on the face of the deceased. The appellants herein were also E
 causing injuries to the deceased using iron pipes and swords. When he
 tried to rescue the deceased, Sambhaji Aher gave a sword blow to his
 left leg. He further deposed that Anil Kale brought the wife of the
 deceased at the spot. The police brought him to the hospital at Shevgaon
 from where he was shifted to Civil Hospital, Ahmednagar for further F
 treatment. During his cross-examination, he deposed that he ate 'Shel'
 with the deceased before the incident. Learned counsel for the appellants
 pointed out that the fact of eating 'Shel' by the deceased had not come
 up in the post mortem examination of the deceased which creates a
.doubt that the narration of the whole incident by the witness is a result of
  an afterthought.                                                            G
       7. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the story of
 PW-8 that he and the deceased had 'Bhel' is falsified by the evidence of
 Dr. Neeta (PW-10), who conducted the post mortem of the body of the

                                                                            H
544           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                              [2017] 8 S.C.R.


A deceased wherein she stated that she did not find any food particles in
  the intestine of the deceased. In this backdrop, it is pertinent to mention
  here the post mortem examination of the deceased which is as under:-
           "A very extensive lacerated wound over face including both eyes,
           nose, mouth, tongue, right cheek along with multiple bone fractures
B          including right orbital bones, right maxilla, nestle bone, right mandible
           along with this both eye balls are collapsed.
           Incise wound over infra mandible area of about 5 x 0 x 2 x 2 cm.
           Incise wound over frontal area with frature frontal bone of 5 x
           0.5 x3 cm.
 c
           Incise wound over left wrist dorsal aspect of about 4 x 0.5 x .5
           cm.
           Incise wound over right partial area of 5 x 5 x 0.5 x 0.5 cm.
           Contusion over left side lower abdomen of 8 x 2 cm.
D
           According to my opinion the probable cause of the death of
           deceased is due to cardio respiratory arrest due to hemorrhage as
           well as nurogenic shock due to very extensive lacerated wound
           over fact including brain along with multiple bone fracture of face.
           Accordingly, I have prepared PM Notes which is in my hand
 E         writing. I am shown the same. It bears my signature, contents
           are correct. It is at Exh. 67. The injuries mentioned in Cl. 17 and
           19 were ante-mortem injuries. The said patient may die instantly
           on account of causing injuries to him as mentioned in post mortem
           notes. Incised wound caused to the deceased could be possible
           by means of sharp edged weapon. Incised could caused to the
 F
           deceased as mentioned in Col. 17 could be possible by means of
           sword i.e., Art. No. 16 and 17 which are now shown to me before
           the Court. The injury No. 16 as mentioned in PM Notes could be
           possible by article No. 18 and 19 which are now shown to me.
           Injury No. I mentioned in CL. 17 of PM Notes could not be
 G         possible by various blows of the weapon. The dead body of the
           deceased Ravindra was lying in dead house of Shevgaon and I
           have carried out post mortem examination over the dead body of
           the deceased there."


 H
         SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                                     545
            MAHARASHTRA [R.K. AGRAWAL, J.]

      Further, during cross-examination, PW-10 deposed as under:~                A
      "Time of death of person can be ascertained by looking into the
      stomach contains, if someone eats food then it remains in stomach
      for half an hour and then it goes to the intestine. One can identify
      the food particles eaten by said patient within the period of two
      hours from that time. I did not find any food particles in the             B
      intestine of the deceased."
        A medical witness who performs a post-mortem examination is a
witness of fact though he also gives an opinion on certain aspects of the
case. The value of a medical witness is not merely a check upon the
testimony of eyewitnesses; it is also independent testimony because it           C
may establish certain facts quite apart from the other oral evidence.
From the evidence on record, inferences are drawn as to the truth or
otherwise of the prosecution case in criminal matters and truth or
 otherwise of a claim in civil matters. ·1n this process, the medical evidence
plays a very crucial role. Ifthere is inconsistency or discrepancy between
 the medical evidence and the direct evidence or between medical evidence        D
 of two doctors, one of whom examined the injured person and the other
.conducted post mortem on the injured person after his death or as to the
 injuries, then in criminal cases, the accused is given the benefit of doubt,
 and let off. Where the direct testimony is found untrustworthy, conviction
 on the basis of medical evidence supported by other circumstantial              E
 evidence can be. done, if that is trustworthy. On a careful perusal of the
 post mortem conducted by PW-I 0, it is very much clear that the death is
  caused by means of a sharp edged weapon and that too possibly by
  means of sword. The evidence given by PW-10 fully corroborates with
  the version given by PW-5 and PW-8 that the appellants herein caused
  the death of the deceased using swords and iron pipes. Il has been              F
  specifically mentioned in the report that injuries could be possible by
 various blows of the weapons. Further, the death was caused due to
  cardio respiratory arrest due to hemorrhage as well as neurogenic shock
  due to very extensive lacerated wound over face including brain along
 with multiple bone fractures on face. The evidence of a medical person           G
  is merely an opinion which lends corroboration to the direct evidence in
 the case. It has been observed in various cases of this Court that where
'the eye witnesses' account is found credible and trustworthy, medical
 opinion pointing to alternative possibilities is not accepted as conclusive.

                                                                                 H
546            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 8 S.C.R.


A            8. Now, we shall deal with the other aspect of the argument
      advanced on behalf of the appellants i.e. in relation to uncertainty in the
      time of occurrence as well as death of the deceased, with reference to
      expert evidence. The contention is that as per the statement of PW-8,
      they had 'Bhel' just before the incident. However, according to the
      medical evidence, there were no food particles in the stomach of the
 B
      deceased. Therefore, the version of PW-8 is falsified by the evidence of
      PW-10, more particularly, wherein she has'Stated that she did not find
      any food particles in the intestine of the deceased. According to the
       learned counsel for the appellants, this causes a serious doubt on the
       very basis of the prosecution story. This argument appears to be of
 c     some significance at the first brush, but when examined in depth in light
       of the entire evidence, it clearly lacks merit.
          9. The presence or absence of food at the time of post-mortem in
   relation to the time of death is based on various factors and circumstances
   such as the type and nature of the food consumed, the time of taking the
 D meal, the age of the person concerned and power and capacity of the
   person to digest the food. In the present case, though PW-8 has stated
   that he had 'Bhel' with the deceased just before the incident, there is no
   evidence about the exact time when the meals were taken or the quantity
   of' Bhel' consumed by the deceased. Judging the time of death from the
   contents of the stomach, may not always be the determinative test. It
 E will require due corroboration from other evidence. lfthe prosecution is
   able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and cumulatively, the
   evidence of the prosecution, including the time of death, is proved beyond
    reasonable doubt and the same points towards the guilt of the accused,
    then it may not be appropriate for the court to wholly reject the case of
 F the prosecution and to determine the time of death with reference to the
    stomach contents of the deceased. Even in Modi s Jurisprudence, it
    has been recorded as under:
              " ... The state of the contents of the stomach found at the time of
              medical examination is not a safe guide for determining the time
  G           of the occurrence because that would be a matter of speculation,
              in the absence of reliable evidence on the question as to when the
              deceased had his last meal and what that meal consisted of."
             Where there is positive direct evidence about the time of
       occurrence, it is not open to the court to speculate about the time of
 ·H
         SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                              547
            MAHARASH.TRA [R.K. AGRAWAL, J.]

occurrence by the presence of faecal matter in the intestine. The question A
of time of death of the victim should not be decided only by taking into
consideration the state of food in the stomach. That may be a factor
which should be considered along with other evidence, but that fact
alone cannot be decisive .
     . 10. This Court in a catena of cases has stated the dictum that B
medical opinion is admissible in evidence like all other types of evidence
and there is no hard-and-fast rule with regard to appreciation of medical
evidence. It is not to be treated as sacrosanct in its absolute terms.
Agreeing with the view expressed in Modi's book on Medical
Jurisprudence and Toxicology, this Court recorded that so far as the·
food contents are concerned, they remain for long hours in the stomach C
and the duration thereof depends upon various other factors.
        l L Further, in Malay Kumar Ganguly vs. Sukumar Mukherjee
 AIR 20 l 0 SC 1162, it has been held by this Court that the opinion could
 be admitted or denied. Whether such evidence could be admitted or
 how much weight should be given thereto, lies within the domain of the D
 court.
          12. It is clear from the depositions of the prosecution witnesses,
· viz., PW-5 and PW-8 which corroborates with the deposition of PW-10
   that the injuries were sustained by a sharp cutting object and not by hard
   and blunt object. Further, the plea raised by learned counsel for the E
   appellants with regard to non-founding of food particles in the intestine
   of the deceased is of no basis as the digestion varies with different
   person even with same material, and sometimes even with the same
   person at different times. With incomplete digestion, no reliable opinion
 · can be given on a medical basis. In fact, there is no positive evidence F
   that the deceased had 'Bhel' along with others. Ifthe period of digestion
   is six hours, the food will be in semi-digested stage upto 2 to 2Yz hours
   and if someone takes food then it remainsjn stomach for half an hour
   and then it goes to the intestine. Even if it be taken that the deceased
   had 'Bhel' along with others and five minutes thereafter the incident
   started in which he succumbed to his injuries, the food will not be G
   converted into semi-digested state and the doctor will not find any food
   particles in the intestine. The digestion of food is one of the important
   data which guide the medical officer in arriving at an opinion as to the
   time of death. This is possible on internal examination.
                                                                           H
548           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2017] 8 S.C.R.


A         13. Shaila Kale-wife of the deceased was examined as PW-12.
  She also deposed that when she was asked by Anil to come, she
  immediately rushed to the spot and noticed that the appellants herein
  were armed with swords and were beating her husband who succumbed
  to his injuries then and there. She lodged a report with the Police about
B the incident which was reduced into writing by mentioning the names of
  all the accused persons therein.
          14. In this view of the matter, the evidence of PWs 5, 8 and 12
   are found to be trustworthy and fully corroborated with each other on
   the point of alleged incident with regard to the involvement of the
   appellants herein. Further, there evidence fully corroborates with the
 C medical evidence given by the Doctor who conducted the post mortem
   of the deceased. Even the injuries sustained by PW-8 while rescuing
   the deceased from the clutches of the accused persons have been
   examined and proved by Dr. Kundalick (PW-11) who found them to be
   of grievous nature. We are of the view that the evidence of the witnesses
 D cannot be brushed aside merely because of some minor contradictions,
   if any, particularly for the reason that the evidence and testimonies of
   the witnesses are trustworthy. However, the prosecution failed to examine
   Devidas Magar and Shridhar Salve who said to have rescued the
   deceased.
 E          Conclusion:
          15. The prosecution has examined material witnesses, viz., PW-
   5, PW-8 and PW-12 who are the eye-witnesses to the alleged incident.
   In our opinion, the High Court was not right in discarding the testimony
   of PW-5 and PW-12 taking into consideration the role played by the
 F appellants herein. The presence of the above witnesses at the place of
   occurrence is clearly established and is not at all doubtful. Though there
   are certain discrepancies but those are so minor in nature that it cannot
   harm the case of the prosecution. Their evidence inspires confidence
   and is natural one which clearly shows that the accused persons formed
   an unlawful assembly along with others with a common object to murder
 G the deceased which was done by causing injuries to his person using
   fatal weapons which fully corroborates with the oral evidence as well as
   the post mortem report of the Doctor (PW-I 0) who conducted the post
   mortem. We do not find any conflict between the oral evidence of the
    above witnesses and medical evidence of PW-10 as alleged by learned
 H
           SANJAY KHANDERAO WADANE v. STATE OF                                   549
              MAHARASHTRA [R.K. AGRAWAL, J.]

counsel for the appellants, particularly, on the point of injuries caused to     A
the deceased on face and head using swords and iron pipes.
        16. In view of the foregoing discussion, we do not find any infirmity
in the orders passed by the High Court with regard to the conviction and
sentence of the appellants-accused. The appeals are accordingly
dismissed.                                                                       B


·Divya .Pandey                                              Appeals dismissed.