SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Bom) 1130

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Bhanudas Bagaji Salve
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Decided on : AUGUST 26, 2005

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3 - Hostile witness - Evidence not adequately corroborated - Inherent lacunas in version given by hostile witness - Suspicion howsoever grave cannot take place of evidence. - It is by now well-settled that mere fact that a witness has been declared hostile does not result in automatic rejection of his evidence. If the evidence of the hostile witness finds corroboration from the facts of the case, same may be taken into account while judging the guilt of an accused. Law in this regard has been laid down by several judgments of the Apex Court. The latest judgment of the Apex Court in this regard is the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Lella Srinivasa Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 2004 SCW 1254, wherein the Apex Court observed as follows :

       "The fact that these witnesses have been declared hostile by the prosecution, does not result in the automatic rejection of their evidence even the evidence of a hostile witness if it finds corroboration from the facts of the case may be taken into account while judging the guilt of an accused."

       Yet another proposition relating to the acceptance of the evidence of a hostile witness was laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad Misra and another, 1996 (10) SCC 360, in the following terms :

       "The evidence of a hostile witness would not be totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or the accused, but it can be subjected to close scrutiny and that portion of the evidence which is consistent with the case of the prosecution or defence may be accepted."

       Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Murder. - Where accused charged for murder of his brother by knife blows on his chest but blood stained clothes seized from person of accused not matched with blood group of accused during investigation then accused entitled to benefit of doubt.

       Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3 - Hostile witness - Effect on prosecution - Fact that witness turned hostile - No automatic rejection of his evidence - Corroborated evidence of hostile witness is also useful. - In the circumstances, it would not be safe to base conviction solely on the basis of the evidence of the hostile witness PW 4 as there is no adequate corroboration by individually proved circumstances and acceptable evidence. There are inherent lacunas in the version given by the hostile witness PW 4 and independent witnesses, one of whom was actually named by PW 4 have not been examined. It is well settled that suspicion, however grave, should not be allowed to take place of proof. In the circumstances, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused.

Judgment

R. S. MOHITE, J.

( 1 ) BY this appeal, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") impugnes the judgment and order dated 20-8-1999 passed by the learned sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Sessions case No. 165 of 1998 by which the accused has been convicted for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal code and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 15 days.

( 2 ) THE brief case of the prosecution as emerges from the record is as under : (a) That deceased Chilu alias Baba Bagaji Salve was the real brother of the accused bhanudas. Both these brothers were residing adjacent to each other at village Nepti. Taluka and District Ahmednagar. Chilu was married to P. W. 3 Nandabai, whereas, accused Bhanudas was married to Parvati. (b) That at about 2 p. m. on 29-8-1998. Parvati wife of the accused started abusing P. W. 3 nandabai. When Nandabai asked her as to why she was abusing her. Parvatibai told her that deceased Chilu had touched her and embraced her. P. W. 3 Nandabai asked her husband Chilu as to whether he had done any such thing but Chilu denied that he had committed any such act. Parvati also informed about the act of the deceased to her husband accused Bhanudas. (c) At about 12 noon the accused Bhanudas came to the house of the deceased, assaulted the inmates who were Nandabai, her daughter, her mother-in-law, broke the bulb and removed the wires. He also drove the members of the family of deceased out of their house and therefore, P. W. 3 nandabai alongwith her mother-in-law went to Nagar taluka Police Station in order to lodge a complaint against the deceased. The police were in the process of registering an NC complaint. While she was at the police station P. W. 9 Saibai who is the sister of the deceased and the accused and her husband P. W. 10 Ashok came to the police Station and told Nandabai that the accused assaulted her husband Chilu by knife and sword. (d) While non-cognizable complaint was about to be recorded, the police received a telephonic call from the Sarpanch of the village informing that Chilu had been assaulted by knife. P. W. 11 Police sub-Inspector Shrikrishna Rajdev, who was attached to Nagar Taluka Police Station, immediately rushed towards the village by a jeep. On reaching the spot, he noticed that Chilu had sustained several stab injuries. The police removed Chilu to the Civil Hospital at ahmednagar. P. W. 9 Saibai and her husband Ashok accompanied the body of Chilu to the Civil Hospital at Ahmednagar. However, on reaching the Civil Hospital, the doctor declared Chilu to be dead. P. W. 11 rajdev, PSI, then took Saibai and her husband P. W. 10 Ashok in the jeep to the Police Station. He recorded the complaint of nandabai (Exhibit 17) after informing her that her husband had died. He thereafter recorded the statements of Saibai and her husband Ashok. He then returned to the village and recorded the statements of other witnesses. He sent his staff in search of the accused and found the accused at about 3 p. m. at village Nimbodi. He arrested the accused and attached his clothes under panchanama (Exhibit 34 ). He then drew inquest Panchanama (Exhibit 13) and the panchanama of the scene of the offence (Exhibit 35 ). He recorded the statements of other witnesses including P. W. 5 Malan who was another sister of the accused and the deceased. On 31-8-1998 the accused made a statement that he would point out the knife concealed by him. Accordingly, a memorandum was prepared and a knife was discovered at the behest of the accused from the bushes near Marathi school and was attached under Panchanama. The clothes of the deceased were also attached under Panchanama (Exhibit 8 ). After completion of the investigation, muddemal was sent to the Chemical Analyser and after receipt of report of the Chemical Analyser (Exhibit 42), a charge-sheet came to be f




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top