Back
2020 Supreme(Bom) 1401
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR
Z.A. HAQ, AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
Pratibha W/o Ganesh Pande - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Cri. Appeal No. 420 of 2020
Decided on : 04-12-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Nihal Dharmadhikari holding for Ms. Ritu P. Jog
For the Respondent: S. S. Doifode, A.P.P.
The main legal principle established is that circumstantial evidence must be wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and incapable of being explained on any other reasonable hypothesis to sustain a conviction.
Headnote:
Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of her mother-in-law based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution's case relied on motive, discovery of the murder weapon, subsequent conduct, and seizure of the house key. The appellant denied her guilt and claimed trial.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish conclusive circumstantial evidence pointing to the appellant's guilt. The court emphasized the need for evidence to be wholly inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and incapable of being explained on any other reasonable hypothesis.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, contradictions in witness depositions, and the relevance of the appellant's subsequent conduct.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that strong suspicion, while may be true, cannot substitute for legal proof. It emphasized the need for unimpeachable evidence to establish guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellant, set aside the conviction, and ordered her immediate release due to the failure of the prosecution to provide conclusive circumstantial evidence.
JUDGMENT :
AMIT B. BORKAR, J. :
Through this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 28-8-2019, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon in Sessions Case No. 96/2016 convicting and sentencing her in the manner stated hereinafter:—
Under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo three month's simple imprisonment.
2. In short, the prosecution case runs as under:—
One Shewantabai Shankar Pande was residing at village Gadegaon Khurd. Her husband Shankar died in the year 2006. She had three sons namely Ramesh, Ganesh and Vilas. Ramesh is residing along with his family at village Korala Pimpri, Tq. Malkapur. Other sons Ganesh and Vilas were staying along with Shewanta. Ganesh married to this accused before about 11 years. Out of the wedlock, they had begotten one son and one daughter. The younger son of Shewanta namely Vilas is mentally ill. He is bachelor and used to be at home. Ganesh is cultivating some land at village Lohara, Tq. Shegaon as a partner in cultivation.
3. On 9-9-2016 at about 3.00 p.m., Pandurang Mahadeo Pande, the cousin brotherinlaw of Shewanta came back to village Sawargaon and he was passing from the house of Shewanta. That time, her younger son Vilas was found sitting in front of the house and called him. Pandurang asked him as to what was happened. Vilas told him that accused has confined his mother Shewanta inside the house by locking the door, she went away somewhere along with her children. Vilas also told Pandurang that he was hungry and asked for bread (Hkkdj). Pandurang found that house was locked. He called from outside, but there was no response from the inside.
4. Then Pandurang called Chairman of Tanta Mukti Samiti Ramkrushna Hingankar, Pandurang Bawaskar and Police Patil Nimbalkar. He narrated the incident to them. Police Patil Nimbalkar broke open the lock of the door by using stone. All of them went inside the house. They found that Shewanta was lying on the bed having quilt on her body. They removed the quilt and found that there were injuries on the head and ear of Shewanta and blood was oozing. They found that Shewanta was no more.
5. Pandurang Pande immediately rushed to the Police Station, Jalgaon Jamod and lodged report by raising suspicion on the accused. It was recorded by PSO Kishor Sherki, PSI. Thereby Crime No. 400/2016 came to be registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Prior to that, PSI Sandip Mupade was sent to the spot of incident by PI Patkar. He proceeded to the spot and prepared its panchnama. He seized bedding of Shewanta under panchnama, collected samples of blood stained earth and simple earth. He also prepared inquest panchnama on the dead body of Shewanta. He sent the dead body to the Rural Hospital, Jalgaon Jamod for postmortem. He wrote letter to the Medical Officer for collection of blood sample and sample of hair of deceased Shewanta. After conducting postmortem, he handed over the dead body to the son of Shewanta namely Ramesh Pande. Then he deposited seized articles in the Malkhana.
6. Further investigation was handed over to API Rathod. As the accused being a lady, he obtained permission from the J.M.F.C. to arrest her in the night time. Accordingly, he arrested her under panchnama by giving notice to her husband. On 10-9-2016 and while in custody, accused made disclosure statement and shown her willingness to get weapon used in the commission of offence i.e. an axe, which was recovered from the house, concealed by her in the heap of firewood. Consequent to her disclosure statement, she led panchas and API Rathod to her house and produced from the heap of firewood, an axe. It came to be seized under the panchnama. The photographs were also taken of the entire exercise. On the same day, API Rathod seized key of the lock of the house of the deceased from the accused under panchnama, so also her clothes. P.C. Fufat
