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

2014 Supreme(Bom) 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
P.V. Hardas and G.S. Kulkarni, JJ.
Naresh Magan Patel and Ors. – Appellant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 819, 694 and 715 of 2005
Decided On: 18.11.2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Yug Mohit Chaudhary and Anjali Patil, Advs.
For Respondents/Defendant: H.J. Dedhia, APP

Headnote:[INDIAN] PENAL CODE, 1860 - Sections 300, 324 and 149 Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3 Conviction for offence of murder. Since evidence of PWs, is intermixed with falsehood and also evidence of injured eye-witness not reliable hence conviction of accused persons, cannot be sustained. PW 1 has admitted that on the day of the incident itself, the weapons had been shown to him which he had noticed to be stained with blood. If that be the case, the entire discovery of the weapons at the behest of the prosecution cannot be relied upon. Since no reliance can be placed on the testimony of the eye-witnesses and since the evidence relating to discovery cannot be relied upon, the appellants are entitled to be given the benefit of doubt.

JUDGMENT

P.V. Hardas, J.

1. The Appellants/Original Accused Nos. 1 to 7, who stand convicted for offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 149, 324 read with 149of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and each accused to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of which to undergo further RI for one month and RI for one month and each accused to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of which to undergo further RI for seven days, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, by judgment dated 12.07.2005, in Sessions Case No. 433 of 2004, by these appeals question the correctness of their conviction and sentence. Criminal Appeal No. 819 of 2005 has been filed by Original Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 5, Criminal Appeal No. 694 of 2005 has been filed by Original Accused Nos. 3 and 4 and Criminal Appeal No. 715 of 2005 has been filed by Original Accused Nos. 6 and 7. Since all these appeals arise from the same judgment of the trial court, these appeals are being decided by this common judgment. Facts in brief, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may be stated thus:-

PW-22 PSI Sandipan Pawar, who on 4.4.2004 was attached to the Malad Police Station and was on duty, received an anonymous telephone call at about 00.15 a.m. informing him that one person was injured due to assault and the relatives of the injured had taken him to the Bhagvati Hospital. PW-22 PSI Pawar, alongwith PI Thakur and other police staff went to the Bhagvati Hospital. Statement of PW-1 Pappu, who was present in the Hospital was recorded at Exhibit 18. On the basis of the said statement, an offence vide Crime No. 171 of 2004 was registered. Inquest panchnama of the dead body of deceased Soni was drawn at Exhibit 29 in the presence of the panch witnesses. The dead body was referred for postmortem examination alongwith the requisition at Exhibit 78. A photographer was called who had taken photographs of the dead body. The clothes of deceased Soni were seized under seizure memorandum at Exhibit 79.

PW-22 PSI Pawar thereafter proceeded to the scene of the incident and in the presence of the panch witnesses drew the scene of the incident panchnama at Exhibit 32. From the scene of the incident he seized sample of ordinary mud and blood mixed mud and one slipper. Photographs of the scene of the incident were also taken by the photographer. The clothes of PW-1 Pappu were seized in the presence of panchas.

PW-23 PI Rajendra Thakur, who was also attached to the Malad Police Station and who had accompanied PW-22 PSI Pawar to the Hospital as well as to the scene of the incident, recorded the statement of witnesses. PW-21 PSI Marathe had arrested Accused Nos. 1 to 5 on 5.4.2004 under arrest panchnama at Exhibit 76. During custodial interrogation, Accused No. 1 Naresh expressed his willingness to point out the place where a pair of scissors and the clothes had been concealed. Accordingly, a memorandum at Exhibit 34 was drawn in the presence of panchas. Accused No. 1 Naresh led the police and panch to a room in Gudiyapada Area and produced a pair of scissors and clothes from the roof of the room which were seized under seizure memorandum at Exhibit 34-A.

During custodial interrogation on 8.4.2004, Accused No. 5 Jitesh expressed his willingness to point out the place where his clothes had been concealed. A memorandum was accordingly drawn in the presence of panchas at Exhibit 40. Accused No. 5 Jitesh led the police and the panch to his house situated at Sarojini Naidu Road and produced one chopper and his clothes which were seized under seizure memorandum at Exhibit 40-A.

On 9.4.2004 Accused No. 2 Mahendra expressed his willingness to point out the place where the clothes worn by him and the blade of scissors had been concealed. A memorandum to that effect was drawn in the presence of panchas at Exhibit 38. Accused No. 2 Mahendra led the Police and the panch near the house of his sister and produced his clothes and scissors which were seized under seiz

















































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top