Back
2017 Supreme(Bom) 2524
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Appellant
Vs.
MOHAN S/O. GOKULRAO RANJWAN - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 130 of 2000
Decided On : 04-07-2017
For the Appellant : Mr. R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P.
For the Respondents:Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate holding for Mr. B.R. Sable, Advocate, Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused when there are serious lacunas in the medical evidence, unnatural conduct of the witness, and perfunctory investigation, leading to doubt about the occurrence of the alleged incident.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Criminal Appeal - Sections 147, 148, 302, 324, 149 of the IPC - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the evidence under Sections 147, 148, 302, 324, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and emphasized the lacunas in the medical evidence, serious lapses in the investigation, and the unnatural conduct of the witness. The court concluded that the accused were entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquitted them.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted the victim and his cousin, resulting in injuries to the victim and the death of his cousin. The victim's evidence was contradicted, and the medical evidence did not conclusively support the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found serious lacunas in the medical evidence, unnatural conduct of the witness, and perfunctory investigation, leading to doubt about the occurrence of the alleged incident. The court concluded that the accused were entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquitted them.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the victim's evidence, the medical evidence, and the conduct of the witness, leading to doubts about the occurrence of the alleged incident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the serious lacunas in the medical evidence, unnatural conduct of the witness, and perfunctory investigation, which created doubt about the occurrence of the alleged incident, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal filed by the State and the Criminal Revision Application filed by the informant, upholding the acquittal of the accused.
S.S. Shinde, J.
Criminal Appeal No.130 of 2000 is filed by the appellant-State, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Beed on 13th August, 1999 in Sessions Case No. 83/1997, and Criminal Revision Application No. 429 of 1999 is filed by the original informant.
2. The prosecution case in nutshell is as under :
Victim Narayan and deceased Subhash are paternal cousins, resident of village Changatpuri, Taluka Partur, District Jalna. On the morning of 06.06.1997, both of them along with other relatives went to village Gadhe Pimpalgaon for settlement of an alliance. They started travelling for Changatpuri in the evening by jeep, and at Majalgaon victim Narayan and deceased Subhash stayed back on the pretext of some work, while others proceeded back to Changatpuri.
3. On the next day morning i.e., on 07.06.1997, victim Narayan returned alone to Changatpuri in an injured condition, and directly went to his house. On getting information about the condition of Narayan, his relations viz. paternal uncle Balasaheb, Ganesh and others went to his house, enquired about the cause of his condition, upon which he told them that while he himself and Subhash had gone to take meals at Amar Permit Room at Majalgaon, altercation took place between them and the owner of the permit room over excessive charging of the bill. The said altercation culminated into incident of assault on them by the owner and waiters of the permit room. The accused assaulted them by stick and iron bars. On account of this incident, both of them sustained injuries. The witness Narayan further informed them about admitting Subhash in the Government Hospital, Majalgaon. On getting this information, informant Rajendra son of deceased Subhash along with his paternal uncle Ganesh went to the Majalgaon to enquire about Subhash. They, after reaching Majalgaon, directly went to Amar Permit Room and Ganesh Taur, paternal uncle of informant Rajendra enquired with accused no. 1 Mohan, who was sitting at the counter, regarding the whereabouts of the person i.e., Subhash, who was injured in the incident of the previous night, and he told them that the said injured was not admitted by the Doctor of Primary Health Center, Majalgaon, and therefore, he was taken to the Civil Hospital, Beed and he has been admitted in the Civil Hospital, Beed.
4. Accordingly, the informant Rajendra and his uncle Ganesh proceeded to Beed and went to Civil Hospital, Beed. The nurse on duty at Civil Hospital, Beed, informed them about admission of injured Subhash and about his demise.
5. Informant Rajendra then lodged the First Information Report about the incident with Head Constable Gode (PW12), who was on duty at the Civil Hospital, Beed at that time. The inquest panchnama was drawn by the Head Constable Gode. The requisition letter was issued to the Medical Officer on duty to conduct the postmortem of the dead body of Subhash. After the postmortem, the dead body came to be handed over to the informant Rajendra, and his uncle Ganesh. They accordingly brought the dead body to Changatpuri and the last rites were performed. The Head Constable Gode forwarded the relevant papers, comprising inquest panchnama, postmortem notes, FIR to Majalgaon Police Station.
6. PSI Gadekar registered offence under penal sections mentioned above vide Crime No. 69/1997, and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, who in turn was pleased to commit it to the learned Sessions Court in a usual manner.
7. The charge under Sections 147, 148, 302, 324 of the IPC and Section 149 of the IPC came to be explained to the accused at Exh.27. They claimed to be tried raising the defence in their statements under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, that they have been falsely implicated in the crime by the witness Narayan on account of strained relations with maternal uncle Nakalgaonkar, residing at Majalgaon and also
