IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD
Ravindra V. Ghuge, B.U. Debadwar, JJ.
The State of Maharashtra & Another Through Post – Appellants
Versus
Krishna Sitaram Pawar & Another – Respondents
Criminal Confirmation Case No. 02 of 2020 with Criminal Appeal No. 398 of 2020
Decided On : 22-12-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. reference to poetry in legal judgment. (Para 1) |
| 2. factual background of the crime and prosecution case. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. testimonies of witnesses and their relevance. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 18) |
| 4. court analysis of evidence and reliability. (Para 20 , 21 , 28) |
| 5. discussion on witnesses turning hostile. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 6. legal implications of the crime on the unborn child. (Para 49 , 63 , 68) |
| 7. court's obligation to impose capital punishment. (Para 72 , 78 , 88 , 108 , 112) |
| 8. final determination of the case and necessary punitive actions. (Para 121 , 124 , 125) |
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.
1. “Hai maujazan ek kulzum-e-khoon kaash yahi ho
Aataa hai abhi dekhiye kya kya mere aage” –
Mirza Ghalib
We find the above verse by the renowned poet Mirza Ghalib, quoted in Bhagwan Dass vs. State (NCT of Delhi) , (2011) 6 SCC 396 .
2. By the Confirmation Case, the sentence of hanging by the neck till the accused Krishna Sitaram Pawar is dead, is placed before us under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for confirmation. By an appeal preferred by the accused Krishna Sitaram Pawar, he prays for the quashing of the impugned judgment and sentence dated 18.06.2020 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No.26/2016.
3. We have heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor (A.P.P.) on behalf of the State and the learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the accused, from 20.10.2020 till 23.10.2020, 27.10.2020 till 29.10.2020, on 24.11.2020 and 27.11.2020. Both of them have extensively referred to the appeal paper book, the record and proceedings and the Muddemal.
(I) PROSECUTION STORY
4. An F.I.R. was registered by Akash Dwarkadas Rathod, aged 22 years, on 24.10.2015 at 16.10 hours. Based on the same, the Police have investigated the murder of Sumanbai (mother-in-law of the accused Krishna) and the quick born child (a full term baby girl) and the attempted murder of Lalita and Alkabai. The prosecution succeeded in acquiring the judgment of conviction against the accused Krishna on the following facts:-
(b) The above three ladies and Akash travelled to Ambad and upon reaching the hospital, were told that their relative had already been discharged. They reached Walkhed point rickshaw stand so as to travel back to their village Walkhed, at about 02:00 pm. Akash told these three ladies to wait near the Ambedkar Chowk since he wanted to do his personal work in the Tehsil Office, Ambad and would return in a short time. After he left on a motorcycle to do his personal work, he received a call on his mobile phone from one Shri Kailas stating that the accused Krishna had stabbed these three ladies with a knife. Akash, therefore, urgently returned to the spot and he saw the three ladies having collapsed on the ground. The accused Krishna was standing there with a knife in his hand that was blood stained. On seeing Akash, he fled along with the knife. Akash got the three ladies admitted to the Government Hospital at Ambad and reached the Ambad Police Sta
Amrik Singh vs. State of Punjab
Anter Singh v. State of Rajasthan
Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Bhagwan Dass vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
Charles Sobraj vs. Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar, New Delhi
Deepak Kumar vs. Ravi Virmani and another
Dhananjoy Chatterjee @ Dhanna v. State of West Bengal
Earabhadrappa alias Krishnappa v. State of Karnataka 1983 (2) SCC 330
Ediga Anamma vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Ishwari Lal Yadav and another vs. State of Chhatisgarh
K.Anbazhagan vs. Superintendent of Police and another
Krishna Mochi vs. State of Bihar
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab 1983 3 SCC 470
Mahesh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Mallikarjun and others vs. State of Karnataka
Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Modan Singh v. State of Rajasthan
Mohd. Aslam v. State of Maharashtra
Mrinal Das v. State of Tripura
Ramesh and others vs. State of Haryana
Rameshbhai Mohanbhai Koli v. State of Gujarat
Rattan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Sevaka Perumal v. State of T.N.
Shankar Kisanrao Khade vs. The State of Maharashtra
Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
State of Rajasthan v. Teja Ram
State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad Misra
State of U.P. vs. Ramesh Mishra and another
State through PS Lodhi Colony, New Delhi vs. Sanjeev Nanda
Veer Singh and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Yomeshbhai Pranshankar Bhatt vs. State of Gujarat
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.