wounds and it is the case of the prosecution that she was assaulted by a sharp edged weapon called as chopper. The learned advocate for the appellant / accused argued that injuries found on the victim, as such, cannot be attributed to a sharp edged weapon like a chopper and therefore, evidence of PW1 Chhaya Jadhav as well as other witnesses examined by the prosecution is not believable. Therefore, benefit of doubt goes to the appellant / accused. It is further argued that even if it is assumed that the injured had suffered injuries as disclosed by PW14 Dr.Dale Rodricues, then also, the prosecution has failed to make out the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC, as for attracting this penal provision, the prosecution is required to establish that the act was done with an intention to commit murder of the victim. This ingredient of the offence is missing from the evidence of the prosecution and therefore, conviction of the appellant / accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC is bad in law. It is further argued that evidence of the prosecution is scanty in order to infer commission of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC.
