The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the 'last seen together theory' and the reliance on circumstantial evidence, medical evidence, and recovery evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal is filed to question legality of Judgment and Order in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2012 dated 17.03.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaysingpur, District Kolhapur (Trial Court).

2. Appellant is convicted by the trial court for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs 1000/-, and in default thereof to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years. Accused is also convicted for offence punishable under section 309 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Both sentences to run concurrently.

3. Prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. Prosecution has heavily relied on “last seen together theory” for indicting the Appellant/accused. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts of the prosecution case which emerge from record are as under:

3.1. On 02.05.2012, Pandurang Ramchandra Kamble (father of Geeta), resident of Rui, Kolhapur, lodged First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) bearing Crime No. 53/12 with Kurundwad Police Station against Appellant under sections 302 and 309 IPC for committing murder of his wife Geeta. Appellant was serving in Sizing Mill and deceased (Geeta Kamble), his wife was an agricultural labourer. Appellant shall be referred to as ‘accused’ for sake of convenience.

3.2. According to Prosecution, accused and Geeta were married for 18 years prior to incident. Accused suspected Geeta of infidelity after death of his father, four to five years before; that one year before the incident due to disputes, mother of accused and Geeta were not staying with him, he convinced them to come and reside with him at Rui, Kolhapur; but ill-treatment and harassment of Geeta continued even thereafter.

3.3. On 02.05.2012 at about 5:30pm in the evening, complainant received a phone call from Bhimrao Kamble, resident of Shirwad that accused assaulted Geeta with a knife and also tried to commit.

3.4. PW-3 with his two sons and brother-in-law PW-6 (Babasaheb Anna Kamble) rushed to Shirwad to their house and saw Geeta lying in a pool of blood and accused also lying grievously injured next to her. He noticed assault marks on the neck, left cheek and left hand of Geeta and noticed that accused had assaulted himself over his stomach, private parts and attempted to commit suicide.

3.5. Kurundwad Police Station Authority registered offence under section 302 and 309 of IPC. Accused was taken to C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur for treatment. Spot Panchanama vide (Exh.36) and Seizure Panchanama of Articles of Geeta vide (Exh.50) was conducted through panchas. Seized articles mentioned in seizure Panchanama (Exh.38) were sent to the Chemical Analyzer for Chemical Analysis vide (Exh.24). Photographs were taken of the spot of incident during Seizure Panchanama, the chit (suicide note) was recovered from the clothes of accused and notebook from which the chit was torn was recovered from his house of Appellant. After completing investigation, chargesheet was filed with the Judicial Magistrate First Class (J.M.F.C) Kurundwad, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions as the offences were triable by the Sessions Court.

4. Charge was framed below Exh. 2. It was read over and explained in vernacular language to accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. Prosecution examined 14 witnesses to bring home the guilt of accused; PW-1 Sachin Malage, PW-2 Pandurang Shivaji Kamble, PW-4 Vishal Mahavir Kamble and PW-5 Chandrakant Shivappa Talware are Pancha witnesses. PW-1 conducted Spot Panchanama at the spot of incident; PW-2 recovered and seized clothes of Geeta and accused and Articles from spot of incident along with the alleged suicide note (chit) from Appellant; PW-4 collected the handwriting specimen of accused for sending it to the Handwriting Expert and PW-5 is the Search Pancha in respect of seizure of the notebo