Back
2012 Supreme(Bom) 84
High Court of Judicature at Bombay
V.M. KANADE & M.L. TAHALIYANI
Narayan @ Appa Bhausaheb Deokate
Versus
State of Maharashtra
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.593 OF 1991
Decided on: 12-01-2012
For the Appellant:Rahul S. Kate, Advocate.
For the Respondent: J.P. Kharge, A.P.P.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of credible evidence and the insufficiency of forensic and medical evidence alone to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
Murder - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Summary: The court acquitted the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment and order of the Trial Court was set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly killing a woman with whom he had an extra marital relationship. The prosecution's case was mainly based on the evidence of the deceased's husband and daughter, who claimed to have seen the appellant with the deceased on the day of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found serious doubts about the evidence of the prosecution's star witnesses and deemed it highly risky to rely on them. The forensic evidence and the medical history given by the appellant were not considered sufficient to sustain the conviction.
Issues: The main issue was the credibility of the prosecution's star witnesses and the sufficiency of the forensic and medical evidence to establish the appellant's guilt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court rejected the evidence of the prosecution's star witnesses and found the forensic and medical evidence insufficient to sustain the conviction.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
M.L. Tahaliyani, J.
Heard Mr. Kate, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Kharge, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State.
2. This appeal impugns the judgment and order dated 3.10.1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati in Sessions Case No.26 of 1990 convicting the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo further R.I. for six months.
3. The appellant had allegedly committed murder of Laxmibai Malekar wife of Hanumant Malekar. The deceased Laxmibai was staying with her family members at Malekar locality by the side of village Dhekalwadi, Songaon road. It is alleged that the deceased Laxmibai had extra marital relationship with the appellant Narayan. It is further alleged that during the period she had extra marital relationship with the appellant, she had also illicit relationship with one Ramchandra Nivrutti Zargad P.W.-4. The appellant did not like the relationship of P.W.-4 with the deceased and therefore, he decided to kill her.
4. It is the case of prosecution that on 7.11.1989, husband of the deceased Laxmibai had gone to Baramati. The deceased Laxmibai and her daughter Bintabai had taken cattle for grazing in the absence of husband of Laxmibai. The husband of Laxmibai, who has been examined as P.W.-1, had returned from Baramati at about 8 p.m. and found that his wife Laxmibai was not at home. Inquiries from his daughter, revealed that Laxmibai had gone to her maternal aunt Suman. P.W.-1, therefore, did not bother much and went to sleep. However, since the deceased Laxmibai did not return till next morning also, he asked his daughter Bintabai to go and check at the house of Suman as to whether the deceased Laxmibai was available there. It was revealed that the deceased was not at the house of her maternal aunt. P.W.-1 therefore, got worried and started searching his wife. P.W. 1. He and his relatives had searched the deceased at various places in the adjoining villages particularly the houses of their relatives. However, she could not be traced. P.W. 1, therefore, inquired from his daughter as to by which route the deceased had gone to the house of Suman. The route through which deceased had reportedly gone to Suman's house was also searched. The dead body of the deceased was found at the land known as 'Katban'. The police patil was informed and information was given to the Police also. The Police had visited the spot and had drawn the panchanama. Statements of the witnesses were also recorded. F.I.R. was lodged at the Police Station by P.W. 13 Asstt. Sub Inspector of Baramati Taluka Police Station. The daughter of the deceased had stated that she had seen the appellant following her mother on the same route through which the deceased was going to her maternal aunt's place. It is a case of the prosecution that since the appellant did not like the relationship of the deceased with P.W. 4 Zargad, he decided to eliminate her. To achieve the said motive, he had taken the deceased at the field and had killed her. The post mortem examination of the dead body revealed that she had died due to excessive haemorrhage due to multiple injuries sustained by her.
5. After completion of investigation, a chargesheet was filed in the Court of Magistrate. The case was committed to the court of Sessions. The learned Trial Court framed a charge u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant had pleaded not guilty and had claimed to be tried. The prosecution had examined in all 14 witnesses in support of its case before the Trial Court. P.W.1 is the husband of the deceased and the complainant. P.W. 2 Bintabai is the star witness and daughter of the deceased. P.W. -3 Ratan Gulab Malekar is one of the family members of the deceased who had stated about the conduct of the appellant and disappearance of the deceased. P.W.4 is Ramchandra Nivrut
