IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
Valmiki Menezes, Shreeram V. Shirsat, JJ.
Shri. Manohar Ketkar - Appellant
Versus
State of Goa and ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2025
Decided On : 14-11-2025
JUDGMENT :
Shreeram V. Shirsat, J.
1. Registry to waive office objections and register the matter.
2. The Appeal is filed challenging the conviction of the Appellant vide Judgment and Order dated 17/08/2024 and 22/08/2024 in Sessions Case No.29/2014 passed by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, at Mapusa, wherein the Appellant was convicted under Section 302 of The INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and was directed to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:-
a. That on 19/11/2013, a complaint was filed by Mr. Manoj Manohar Ketkar to the effect that on 18/11/2013 at about 14:30 hrs., Accused/Appellant Manohar Ketkar committed murder of his wife Manisha Manohar Ketkar (Mother of the Complainant) over suspect of her character.
b. That upon receipt of such information, Bicholim Police Station registered Crime No. 203/2013 at 1:30 hrs. under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860. That in pursuance of the said complaint, a search in Ladfem area near Nestle Factory was conducted by the Police Inspector Mr. Neenad Deulkar and during the said search at about a distance of around 300 to 350 meters approximately a shed was noticed wherein a dead body was seen lying. As it was night time, the scene of offence was not disturbed and the same was preserved and guarded by deploying police constables to guard the scene.
c. Further on 19/11/2013 at 08:00hrs, Police Inspector Neenad Deulkar along with staff of Bicholim Police Station left for investigation. The Police Inspector then secured presence of two Panchas namely Mr. Mohan Chandrakant Gaonkar and Mr. Vishram Yeshwant Gawade and photographer namely Srinivasan R. Naik and conducted panchanama of scene of offence in the property of Mr. Savoikar at Kulan, Ladfem, Bicholim- Goa. During the scene of offence panchanama, certain incriminating articles were seized which were attached and marked. That the dead body of the deceased was seen in the said property in a structure built with laterite stones and partly with asbestos sheets. The said dead body was then removed and identified by the Complainant Mr. Manoj Ketkar to be of his mother namely Mrs. Manisha Manohar Ketkar (Wife of the Appellant). After concluding the scene of offence panchanama in the presence of the same pancha witnesses, inquest Panchanama was conducted.
d. That during the inquest Panchanama the Investigating Officer observed that the chin of the deceased was tied with the white cloth and with the cotton thread. Some jute thread was seen tied around the neck of the deceased, and both the hands of the deceased were tied with the jute thread at the back.
e. That on 20/11/2013, Dr. Pannag S. Kumar, Assistant Lecturer, Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Goa Medical College, Bambolim-Goa, conducted post mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased Mrs. Manisha Manohar Ketkar and vide Autopsy Report No. 1071/2013 dated 20/11/2013 certified that the cause of death is due to “Asphyxia as a result of strangulation by ligature vide injury No.1 which was ante mortem and fresh at the time of death and necessarily fatal”. The necessary exhibits and viscera were also collected and preserved, so also sample of blood of the deceased was collected and sent to Medical Officer on duty of Blood Bank, GMC, Bambolim. Dr. Clare S. D’Mello of Blood Bank, GMC Bambolim, conducted blood grouping test in respect of blood sample of deceased which was forwarded by the Police Surgeon in sealed condition with the seal of the Forensic Medicine, GMC Bambolim and certified that the blood of the deceased was Hemolysed.
f. That on 22/11/2013, A.S.I Rama P.N. Gaonkar in the presence of two pancha witnesses namely Mr. Vishant Hari Tari and Vishnu Yeshwant Gawas conducted attachment panchanama in respect of the clothes/belongings of the deceased Mrs
The court held that mere suspicion is insufficient for a conviction; a complete chain of circumstantial evidence is required to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Circumstantial evidence requires complete unbroken chain conclusively proving guilt and excluding innocence hypothesis; failure of key links like last seen, extra-judicial confession, motive, recover....
Provisions of Section 106 of Evidence Act itself are unambiguous and categoric in laying down that when any fact is especially within knowledge of a person, burden of proving that fact is upon him.
In circumstantial murder cases, last seen theory alone cannot sustain conviction without complete evidentiary chain excluding innocence, especially with wide time gap allowing third-party interventio....
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, every link in the evidence chain must be fully established, with a complete narrative supporting the conclusion of guilt; mere suspicion is insuffi....
The court emphasized that circumstantial evidence must establish a complete and unbroken chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in capital cases.
In a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, multiple corroborative factors, including the last seen theory and absence of alternative explanations, can establish guilt beyond reasonable ....
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.