Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 1883
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
Amin s/o Hiraji Tamboli - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.317 OF 2013
Decided on : 21-11-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. V.P. Golewar Advocate appointed through Legal Aid
For the Respondent: Mr. M.M. Nerlikar, A.P.P.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence to establish guilt under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 302, Section 201 - The court discussed the chain of circumstances, including the accused's attempt to sell cement bags, the deceased's objection, and the subsequent killing and disposal of the body. The court found the accused guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, a truck driver, was convicted for the murder of the cleaner on the truck. The prosecution presented evidence of the accused's attempt to sell cement bags, the deceased's objection, and the subsequent killing and disposal of the body. The trial court convicted the accused based on circumstantial evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court found the accused guilty of murder based on the chain of circumstances presented by the prosecution, including the accused's actions and the deceased's objection to the sale of cement bags.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused was guilty of murder based on the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the chain of circumstances, including the accused's attempt to sell cement bags, the deceased's objection, and the subsequent killing and disposal of the body, to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
S.S. SHINDE, J.
1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 4th July 2013, passed by the Sessions Judge, Latur in Sessions Case No.26 of 2012 thereby convicting accused/Appellant Amin Hiraji Tamboli for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "I.P. Code") and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as under:
(A) At the material time, the accused-appellant was a driver on a truck bearing No.MH17T9856, owned by Pandurang Bhawar, resident of village Dev-Daithan, Tq Shrirampur, Dist Ahmednagar, who was the transporter by occupation. On the said truck deceased Mahavir Prabhakar Waghmare was a cleaner.
(B) On 22nd August 2011, the accused as a driver, and the deceased, as a cleaner, on the truck bearing aforestated number, left village Dev-Daithan, Tq Shrirampur, Dist Ahmednagar. On the same day, in the evening, the truck was loaded at Ahmednagar and then the accused and the deceased transported the goods to Solapur. At Solapur, the truck was unloaded and then it was taken to the Office of Hindustan Transport, at Solapur. At Solapur, the truck was loaded with cement bags, which were to be delivered at village Yedshi and village Kallam, in Osmanabad District.
(C) It is alleged that after loading the truck with cement bags at Solapur, the accused and the deceased proceeded to village Yedshi, in Osmanabad District. On 25th August 2011, in the morning, the truck was partly unloaded by delivering the cement bags to Nanasaheb Pawar, who does the business of building materials, under the name and style "Yeshwant Traders" at Yedshi.
(D) It is the further case of the prosecution that while the truck was being unloaded at Yedshi, the accused and the deceased went to country liquor shop. After some time, they returned back to the truck. Nanasaheb Pawar, to whom the bags of cement were delivered, issued an acknowledgement of the receipt of the cement bags to the accused. Thereafter, the accused and the deceased, in the said truck, left village Yedshi, DistOsmanabad, for the delivery of the remaining cement bags to a trader at village Kallam, DistOsmanabad.
(E) It is alleged against the accused that he wanted to sell remaining cement bags, instead of its delivery to a trader at Kallam, Dist Osmanabad and, as such, he took the truck loaded with cement bags to his native place village Bhise Wagholi, Tq. & Dist Latur. It is further alleged that the deceased Mahavir, who was a cleaner on the truck, objected the sale of the cement bags and, therefore, the accused apprehended that the deceased would disclose his plan of selling of the cement bags to his employer and, as such he decided to kill the deceased.
(F) It is further alleged that the accused took the truck, loaded with cement bags, to K.T. Weir, which is outside village Bhise Wagholi and parked the said truck near the K.T. Weir. Thereafter, the accused in between 25th August 2011 and 26th August 2011, is alleged to have hit the deceased by iron rod on his head, as a result, the deceased sustained a depressed fracture over right parietal region. The deceased, after sustaining head injuries, died on the spot. The accused threw the dead body of the deceased in weir water with an intention to destroy or cause disappearance of the evidence of murder.
(G) The prosecution has alleged that the accused, after causing death of the deceased, wanted to sell the cement bags but wheels of the truck rooted into the mud or mire, and as such the accused could not move the truck to a suitable place for sale of cement bags.
(H) The accused, after the incident, absconded. His employer, from 25th August onwards, contacted him on the cellphone, but the cellphone of the accused was switched off. In the meantime the office of Hindustan Transport, at Solapur, informed the employer of the accused that the accused did not deliver
