Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 987
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE & S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
The State of Maharashtra - Appellant
Versus
Ankush Rangnath Kolekar & Ors. - Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 346 OF 1999
Decided On : 21-07-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. S.J. Salgare, A.P.P.
For the Respondent:Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the importance of credible and reliable evidence, and the need for corroboration from independent witnesses.
Headnote:
ABETMENT - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 378(1) - Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 324, 504 r/w Section 34 -
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an appeal by the State against the acquittal of four respondents (accused Nos. 1 to 4) of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324 and 504 individually or r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The prosecution's case was that the accused had assaulted the informant and his family members, resulting in the death of the informant's father.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence provided by the prosecution, including the testimony of the eyewitnesses, was not sufficient to prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted inconsistencies in the evidence, lack of corroboration from independent witnesses, and the possibility of the deceased sustaining the fatal injury due to a fall. As a result, the court held that the prosecution had failed to prove the offences alleged against the accused and acquitted them.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of the eyewitness testimony, the presence of independent witnesses, and the cause of the deceased's fatal injury.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle that in appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must bear in mind the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and the need for the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court also highlighted the importance of credible and reliable evidence, the lack of corroboration from independent witnesses, and the need to consider all possible views of the evidence.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court also abated the appeal against one of the accused who had passed away during the pendency of the appeal.
S.M. GAVHANE, J.
. The appellant/State has filed this appeal under Section 378(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment and order dated 18.05.1999 in Sessions Case No. 191 of 1995 passed by learned 2nd Additional Session Judge, Ahmednagar thereby acquitting all the four respondents (accused Nos. 1 to 4) of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324 and 504 individually or r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the IPC). Respondent No.3/accused No.3-Mahadeo Kolekar is reported dead on 09.03.2015 during pendency of the appeal as stated in the affidavit (Flag-A) dated 18.06.2015 of respondent No.1/accused No.1-Ankush Kolekar and as seen from the copy of the death certificate of accused No.3Mahadeo Kolekar produced alongwith above affidavit which is not disputed by the appellant/State and therefore the appeal is abated against accused No.3-Mahadeo Kolekar.
2. The prosecution case, in short, is as under:
A. The informant/complainantAjinath Baban Kolekar (P.W.1) was residing alongwith his father Baban Kolekar (deceased), mother Shantabai and brother Navnath (PW-6) jointly in the field in the limits of village Waki, Tq. Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar. At the time of the incident he was having land in Waki Shivar along the Khairi Dam. All the accused who are brothers interse and cousins of PW-1 were also having the land adjacent to the land of the informant. The informant had obtained sanction to supply water to his land by installing electric motor on Khairi Dam. So also, the accused had installed electric motor on the Khairi Dam prior to eight days of the incident. For installing electric motor accused No.1 Ankush and his brothers had spent Rs.500/-for electric pole and electric wire. And about one month prior to the incident the MSEB had taken the electric line.
B. It is alleged that on 07.04.1995 in the morning at about 10.00 a.m. the informant, his brother Navnath (PW-6) and father Baban went to Khairi Dam with material of electric motor to install the same and when they were laying down the cable of the electric motor from the electric pole up to the electric motor, the informant's father was sitting under the shadow of Babhul tree and while informant and his brother Navnath were laying down the cable on the land in the noon at about 01.00 p.m. all four accused came there. Accused No.1 Ankush said that he incurred the expenses of bringing the electric pole and wire from Jamkhed and that said expenses should be given first and then motor should be installed, otherwise they would not allow the informant to install the motor. Thereupon the informant said him that he is ready to give him expenses whatever he has incurred within a day or two. Thereupon accused No.1 started abusing to informant and his brother Navnath and hits stone upon the right shoulder of the informant by throwing. Accused No.2 Shivaji hits stone to Navnath by throwing and accused No. 4Dattatray assaulted Navnath by chain in his hand.At that time Navnath shouted and started running, therefore when the father of the informant i.e. deceased came in to rescue, accused No.3 Mahadeo hit stone to the head of the father of the informant. As a result he fell down on the ground and started shouting loudly. The blood was oozing from his head injury. On hearing commotion Shantabai-mother and Nandabai-Sister of the informant came running there. At that time accused No.2 Shivaji threw stone to Nandabai-sister of the informant. The deceased was unconscious after he fell down on the ground. The above said assailants went away. They (informant and others) tried to stand up the deceased by holding him and he was seen dead. Then dead body was brought at the Vasti. On the same day the informant/complainant went to Police Station, Jamkhed at about 16.05 hours and narrated the incident happened to the PSI Gaikwad (PW-11) who reduced the complaint into writing and treating the same as First Information Report registered the crime No.41/1995 for the offen
