Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 858
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE & S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
The State of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
Sukhdeo Sitaram Amale – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 471 OF 1999
Decided On : 06-07-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. S.D. Ghayal, APP
For the Respondent:Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances must unequivocally point towards the guilt of the accused and be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - [Summary of Acts and Sections]
Fact of the Case:
The State appealed the acquittal of the respondent, who was originally accused of the murder of two individuals. The prosecution alleged that the accused, who had a history of harassing the informant's family, committed the murders with an axe. The evidence included witness statements, post-mortem reports, and photographs of the crime scene.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court acquitted the respondent due to insufficient evidence connecting him to the murders. The court found that the prosecution's evidence, including witness statements and circumstantial evidence, was not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: The main issue was whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances must be cogently and firmly established, leading to the only conclusion of the accused's guilt. The court also highlighted the principle that suspicion, by itself, is not sufficient to establish guilt.
Final Decision: The appeal filed by the State was dismissed, and the acquittal of the respondent-accused was upheld.
S.S. SHINDE, J.
This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 16th September, 1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur in Sessions Case No. 33 of 1997, thereby acquitting the respondent i.e. original accused for the offences punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short “I.P.C.”).
2. The prosecution case in nutshell, is as under :-
(A) Informant-Dattatraya Amale and the accused, who are real brothers, are residing in Gat No.118 along with their children. The accused was serving in Army and he started harassing the informant and his family members. On 27th April, 1996 at about 8.30 a.m., the complainant, who is serving in the Telecommunication Department, had gone to Shrirampur for attending his duty. While he was on duty, his wife met him in the office at 12.30 p.m. and told that the accused had cut one Mango tree, and when his son Vikas asked him as to why he has cut the said mango tree, he dragged him and beat in front of his house. Thereafter, his son Vikas had filed complaint against accused in Haregaon Police Outpost, and he returned back to the house. Thereafter, Informant-Dattatraya and his wife came back from Shrirampur to their farm house. When they reached to the house, they found that, their son Vidnyan and Gokul were lying in a pool of blood. Vidnyan was lying on Ota and second son Gukul was lying near the threshold of his house. They were no more and hence, first information report came to be filed by Dattatraya in Haregaon Police Outpost against accused Sukhdeo.
(B) Thereafter, the P.S.I. Suresh Bhamre (PW-9) had received message from village Sarala regarding incident of commission of murders of sons of the informant. Hence, he went to Haregaon Police Outpost, and told the Police In-charge of said Police Outpost that along with him they should go to the scene of offence, in order to see and find out what had really happened. Thereafter, he along with the police constables from Haregaon Police Outpost went to the spot of incident and recorded the complaint of Informant-Dattatraya Amale and registered the offence. Thereafter, he went to the scene of offence and drew inquest panchanamas of dead bodies of Vidnyan and Gokul. He thereafter seized one axe, which was lying there at the spot and also blood stained earth. He thereafter drew panchanama in respect of scene of offence. Thereafter, he recorded the statements of the witnesses. As a part of further investigation, the map in respect of scene of offence was drawn by the Revenue Circle Inspector and the Medical Officer Mr. Madhav Jadhav, conducted the post-mortem on the dead bodies.
(C) Thereafter, the statement of daughter of accused by name Sonali, aged six years, who was studying in 4th standard at the time of alleged incident, came to be recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the Special Executive Magistrate Shri. Ramdas Januji Shinde on 13th May, 1996. In said statement, she disclosed that, she saw her father i.e. the accused Sukhdeo, while committing murders of Vidnyan and Gokul with the help of axe. It has been alleged that, Smt.Sitabai Bhaskar Gaikwad, who is the resident of village Malewadi, had also seen the accused along with an axe prior to the incident. According to the prosecution, she had gone towards the land of Informant-Dattatraya on the day of alleged incident in order to remove weed from his land. At that time, the wife of the informant by name Janabai met her, and told that the accused had cut the branches of her mango tree and hence, she wanted to lodge the complaint against accused Sukhdeo and accordingly she left to go to the police station. Smt. Sitabai saw Smt. Janabai, the wife of the informant and her elder son Vikas, while proceeding towards Police Station on a bicycle in order to file the first information report against the accused. Thereafter, after a period of one and half hour, while she was working in the field of Informant-Datt
