SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Bom) 2113

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Revati Mohite Dere, Gauri Godse, JJ.
Sachin Shrikant Navgire - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 746 of 2018
Decided On : 18-10-2023

Advocates appeared:
Balwant Salunkhe, Advocate, Rohini Kamble, Advocate, Dipak Mane, Advocate, Veerdhawal Deshmukh, Advocate, Rohin R.Chauhan, Advocate, A.V.Konde Deshmukh, Advocate, P.P.Shinde, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
The necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, and the importance of establishing a clear connection between the accused and the crime.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER AND THEFT - IPC SECTIONS 302, 394, 450 - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 302 (punishment for murder), 394 (punishment for robbery), and 450 (house trespass in order to commit an offence punishable with imprisonment for life) of the Indian Penal Code. The court emphasized the necessity of proving the circumstances of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, referencing the five golden principles established in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra regarding circumstantial evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a clear connection between the accused and the crime, leading to the conclusion that the evidence presented was insufficient for conviction.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted for the murder of Shakuntala Dhavale, a 72-year-old woman, who was found dead in her apartment with signs of struggle and missing gold ornaments. The prosecution's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including the recovery of gold ornaments and a katha rope from the appellants.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution's evidence, primarily based on recovery, was insufficient to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence presented had significant loopholes and lacked corroboration regarding the ownership of the recovered items.

Issues: Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence, particularly the recovery of gold ornaments and katha rope.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence that excludes any reasonable doubt regarding the innocence of the accused. The court found that the evidence of recovery was not reliable and did not connect the appellants to the crime.

Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the conviction and sentence were quashed, and the appellants were acquitted of all charges.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. - By these appeals preferred under Sec. 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('Cr.P.C'), the appellants have impugned the judgment and order dtd. 28/4/2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 317 of 2007, by which, the learned Judge was pleased to convict and sentence the appellants as under; -for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2, 000.00 in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months; -for the offence punishable under Sec. 394 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.1, 000.00 in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month; -for the offence punishable under Sec. 450 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.500.00 in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days. The aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case in brief is as under; It is the prosecution case that one Shakuntala Dhavale (deceased) aged 72 years, was residing alone in Flat No.105, 106 Vishal Apartment, Sadashiv Peth, Pune. Shakuntala was running an STD booth at Omkar General Store, Sadashiv Peth, Pune and would visit the said booth wearing gold ornaments. On 17/11/2006, the son and daughter-in-law of Shakuntala received a call from her neighbour - Smt.Abhyankar stating that the door of Shakuntala's house was open and there was no movement seen inside the house and that the STD booth had also not been opened. Pursuant thereto, Shakuntala's son and daughter-in-law proceeded to the said flat and found pieces of glass bangles scattered on the floor in the passage and hall and the deceased was seen lying on the floor with both her legs and hands tied with katha rope. One red colour cloth was found thrust in Shakuntala's mouth and the gold ornaments worn by her were found to be missing. Accordingly, the Police were informed and Shakuntala was taken to Sasoon Hospital, where she was declared dead. Accordingly, Neeta Dhavale - daughter-in-law of deceased lodged an FIR alleging theft and murder of her mother-in-law i.e. Shakuntala Dhavale. During the course of investigation, the appellants alongwith juvenile accused came to be arrested on 20/11/2006. After investigation, chargesheet was filed as against the appellants in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Since the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Pune, for trial. As far as the third accused is concerned, a juvenile, chargesheet against him was filed in the Juvenile Court and he was tried by the Juvenile Court. As far as the appellants are concerned, charges were framed as against them by the trial Court, to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of the appellants was that of total denial and false implication. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined as many as 18 witnesses i.e. P.W.1- Smt. Neeta Uday Dhavale (PW-1), informant - daughter in law of the deceased; P.W.2 - Shri Shrikar Manohar Devlalkar, panch - to recovery of katha rope at the instance of appellant - Sachin; P.W.3 - Smt. Sayali Sachin Abhyankar, neighbour of the deceased; P.W.4 - Ajay Madhukar Dalvi - Panch to the Spot Panchanama; P.W.5 - Sachin Dinkar Abhyankar, neighbour of the deceased; P.W.6 - Dr. Ganesh Pandurang Pujari, the Medical officer, who performed the post mortem; P.W.7 - Kapil Anand Kulkarni, panch - to recovery of some gold ornaments at the instance of appellant - Santosh; P.W.8 - Dagdu Suryabhan Selkar, panch - to the recovery of some gold ornaments at the instance of appellant - Santosh; P.W.9 - Sanjay Ramnaresh Mantri; P.W.10 - Smt. Lala Jayant Dusane, neighbour of the deceased; P.W.11 - Ms. Suchitra Ghansham Patil, Nayab Tahsildar who conducted the TIP; P.W.12 - Mahadev Ramchand

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top