Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.S. Shinde, V.G. Bisht, JJ.
State Of Maharashtra - Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Rajaram Mugade - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 434 of 1999
Decided On : 10-02-2020
Criminal Appeal - Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 - The judgment discusses the prosecution's failure to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that the evidence was not consistent with the hypothesis of the accused's guilt and did not exclude every possible alternative hypothesis. The court concluded that the prosecution utterly failed to prove the case against the accused, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the accused, Sanjay Mugade, along with other individuals, committed the murder of Sunita Mugade. The dead body of a woman was found in a field with multiple injuries. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, as there were no eyewitnesses to the incident. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be falsely implicated. The prosecution presented 17 witnesses and evidence, including the identification of the dead body by the victim's family, recovery of a knife, and alleged confessions by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the body found was that of the deceased Sunita and that the accused were responsible for the injuries. The court noted inconsistencies in the evidence, including the condition of the dead body, the recovery of the knife, and the identification of the deceased. The court also highlighted the lack of conclusive evidence connecting the accused to the crime. As a result, the court acquitted the accused of all charges.
Issues: The main issue was whether the prosecution could prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt based on the circumstantial evidence presented.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of circumstantial evidence and emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish a chain of evidence that excludes every possible hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. The court also considered the Supreme Court's guidelines on circumstantial evidence and the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused, concluding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
JUDGMENT
S S Shinde, J. - This Criminal Appeal takes an exception to the judgment and order dated 29/04/1999 IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Satara in Sessions Case No. 82 of 1997 acquitting both the accused from the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution story in nutshell is as under:
On 19/12/1996 one Bajarang Kundalik Patil noticed a dead body of a woman lying in his field. There were injuries on the said dead body. On the basis of the information given by Bajarang Kundalik Patil, the police of Sangli (R) Police Station registered a crime vide Cri. No.115/96 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter police went to the field of Bajarang Patil, prepared inquest panchanama, spot panchanama and then sent the dead body to Government Hospital for post-mortem. As the dead body was of woman, the photographs of the said dead body were taken, and published in various news paper and circulated in the District of Sangli, Kolhapur, Satara, etc. PSI Vijay Uttam Bagal of Sangli (R) Police Station started inquiry and investigation. When PSI Bagal found that the dead body started to decompose, he gave it to municipality, Sangli to dispose it off. On 18/01/1997 PSI Bagal received a missing pamphlet of Dhebewadi Police Station bearing Missing No.1/97, from which he learnt that Sunita Mugade and Sanjay Rajaram Mugade of village Sanbur are missing from 14/12/96. PSI Bagal found that the photograph of dead body and the photograph of missing woman were practically same. He, therefore, deputed one constable to make inquiry. It was reported to PSI Bagal that Sau. Akkatai Rajaram Jadhav identified the photograph that of her daughter. On 23/01/1997 the said Akkatai and her son Prakash came to the police station where they identified the photographs and the ornaments which were found on the dead body and told that the photograph and ornaments are of Sunita. At that time, Prakash - the brother of Sunita, produced photo copy of inland letter received from his brother in law Sanjay Mugade. From the contents of said letter it was disclosed that murder of Sunita was committed by her husband Sanjay Mugade, her brother in law Vijay and maternal uncle Udhav Shedage with the help of jeep driver Guruling Atyal. During investigation it was revealed that Sunita was killed in Divashi Ghat and her dead body was carried and thrown in the field between Sangali and Ashta. Thereafter PSI Bagal went to village Sanbur where Sanjay and his brother Vijay were residing. Sanjay could not be traced and it was learnt that Vijay went to Bombay. PSI Bagal arrested Udhav Shedage. On inquiry being made it was disclosed that Jeep bearing registration No. MH-11-E-1250 was belonging to Sunil Yashwant Patil of Mendh, Tal. Patan. Guruling Atyal was his driver. The said jeep was attached. Blood stains on the tarpaulin hood and on the back side seat of the said jeep were found. Satara Police arrested Sanjay. During inquiry he admitted the contents of letter alleged to have been sent by him. Accused Sanjay confessed the commission of offence to one Suresh Shedage. On 29/01/1997 accused Sanjay taken panchas and police to village Tung where dead body of Sunita was found, and then to Divashi Ghat where he alleged to have assaulted and killed Sunita.
As the place of crime was within jurisdiction of Patan Police Station, the case was transferred to Patan police Station wherein it was registered as Cri. No.10/97 at Patan Police Station. On 03/02/1997 ASI Shirtikar obtained custody of Sanjay, Vijay and Guruling Atyal. On the behest of accused Snjay a knife which was alleged to have been used to kill his wife Sunita was recovered from Mori No.10/64 in Divashi Ghat and the same was attached under a panchanama Thereafter the attached knife, blood stains cloths of deceased, blood stained and plain earth collected from the place where dead body was found were sent to Chemical Analyzer f
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
