The judgment emphasizes the importance of corroborative evidence and the sufficiency of evidence in establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT : [PER D.G.DESHPANDE,J.]

1. Heard learned APP Mr.Pol for the State - Appellant and, learned advocate Mr.Ingawale for the Accused - Respondents.

2. This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 28.08.1989 of the IIIrd Addl.Sessions Judge, Kolhapur by which the learned Addl.Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused of the offences under Sections 318, 176, 201 r/w 34 and of the offences under sections 304, 315, 314, 316 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. By the said judgment accused No.1 was also acquitted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under :-

Victim in this case is one Yallubai. She was the daughter of Babu Naik (PW 7). He was living in Arjunwadi with his family members. He has two houses in the said village. Yallubai used to cook food for them and used to go to other house for tethering cattle. Accused No.3 used to go to the house of Yallubai for taking food and she used to serve food to him. Illicit relationship was developed between them. She became pregnant from accused No.3. In order to avoid pregnancy, accused No.3 took Yallubai to the hospital of accused Nos. 1 and 2 at Mouje Adkur. She was admitted for abortion. Prior to that, accused No.3 took Yallubai to the hospital of Dr.Dalwi (PW 8). But he refused to do abortion.

4. When the abortion was carried on at the hospital of accused Nos. 1 and 2, Yallubai died due to excessive bleeding and in order to hide this offence, accused No.2 with the help of his friend Albert Lobo (PW 5) brought the body of Yallubai to Adkur and all the accused buried her body within the limits of Adkur and Saroli.

5. The father of Yallubai had lodged a complaint that his daughter was missing from 12.8.86. On 14.8.86 PW.1 Head Constable received one anonymous letter and, therefore, he started making inquiry. He learnt about the aforesaid activities of the accused. On 19.8.86 he lodged complaint i.e. FIR (Exhibit 21) against the accused. Then investigation was carried out by PSI Pratap Randiwe (PW 12). The accused were arrested. Dead body of Yallubai was recovered. It was sent for post-martem. Articles used for burying the dead body of Yallubai were recovered. From the statement of accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, clothes were recovered. Hospital was seen and visited. Incriminating articles were seized and when the Doctor opined that Yallubai died as a result of shock due to perforation of uttered following abortion i.e. due to excessive bleeding on account of abortion, a charge sheet came to be filed against the accused.

6. The prosecution has examined in all thirteen witnesses and produced number of documents in support of the charges which were framed against all the accused. The charges against accused No.1 to 3 were under Sections 304, 315, 314, 316 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and, the charges against accused Nos.1 to 6 were under Sections 318, 176 and 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No.3 was charged for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In support of each charge, the trial Court framed 8 points for determination, but gave negative findings on all those points and consequently acquitted the accused. Hence this appeal.

7. The learned APP Mr.Pol contended that the approach of the trial Court is totally and completely wrong. The trial Court has failed to take into consideration the vital and important evidence of P.W.8 Dr.Ramchandra Dalwi to whom accused No.3 had taken Yallubai for carrying out abortion. He further contended that the trial Court also disregarded the evidence of father and grand-mother of Yallubai about intimacy of accused No.3 with Yallubai and Yallubai becoming pregnant before marriage and also disregarded other material circumstantial evidence brought on record in the form of recovery of incriminating articles at the instance of accused

Click Here to Read the rest of this document