Circumstantial evidence requires complete chain excluding innocence; long time gap invalidates last seen theory without ruling out third-party intervention; open-place recoveries lack credibility; unproved motive and investigative lapses lead to acquittal despite suspicion.

JUDGMENT :

SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.

1. The present Appeal has been filed challenging the impugned Judgment and Order dated 08.08.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge- 2, Baramati, District Pune, in Sessions Case No. 09/2017 whereby the Appellant has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and has been sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/- and in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year. The Appellant has also been convicted under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code () and has been sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer RI for 2 months.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution’s case are as under:

a. On 04/09/2016, one Mahadev Baburao Gadhwe lodged a complaint that when he was going towards Pune at about 10:30 a.m., one person coming from the Baramati side told him that one person was lying on the road and some other persons were gathered there. Hence, the Complainant went at the site and found that near the field of one Majid Abbas Pathan, on the side of the road going towards Bholobawadi, one person aged about 20 to 25 years was lying on his stomach in a pool of blood. There was a grievous injury on the back of his head and blood was oozing out. His eyes were closed and there was no movement. The Complainant and the other persons gathered at the spot made inquiries in the nearby vicinity, but his name and address could not be ascertained. The said person was wearing black-coloured Bermuda shorts and green-coloured underwear. The complainant thereafter lodged a complaint alleging that some unknown person had killed the said unknown person by assaulting him on the backside of the head.

b. On the basis of the said report, an offence was registered vide Crime No. 5 of 2016 under Section 302 of the I.P.C. against an unknown person. The investigating team swung into action and visited the spot of the incident and carried out the further investigation

c. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet against the accused came to be presented before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Daund, District Pune, who committed the case, it being triable exclusively by the Court of Session.

3. The charges came to be framed on 27.06.2018 for the offences under Section 302 r/w 201 of the IPC to which the Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter trial commenced and the prosecution examined 13 witnesses in support of the case. The Appellant did not examine any defence witness. After examination of witnesses, examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 came to be recorded. The defence of the Appellant is of total denial and false implication in the crime.

4. To bring home the guilt of the Appellant, the prosecution in all examined 13 witnesses :

5. The Learned Sessions Judge after hearing the arguments of the Public Prosecutor and Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, vide order dated 8/8/2022 was pleased to convict the Appellant under Sections 235 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,500/- and in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. The trial court als