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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Ranjit More and Surendra P. Tavade, JJ.
Girvarsingh Bhagwatsingh Devda —Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra —Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.672 of 2017
Decided on 25.2.2020

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: Ms. Jai Kanade a/w Shashkant P. Choudhari, Rahul Shirgavkar, Kishori Tribhuvan, Amrendra Jha i/b Legal Hopes
For the Respondent: Mr. Arfan Sait, APP

IMPORTANT POINT
Contents of seizure Panchanama cannot be ignored.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302, 392 and 397—Dacoity with murder—Appeal against conviction—Witness has identified appellant in Court as well as in test identification parade—It is also established on record that mobile in question was seized from possession of appellant at the time of his arrest—SIM was in name of deceased—Tower location of phone was within vicinity of scene of offence at the time of incident—Prosecution has established presence of appellant in vicinity during time of incident—Major link between appellant and crime is seizure of blood stained clothes and stolen articles—Contents of seizure Panchanama cannot be ignored—Prosecution has proved fact of recovery of coins at instance of appellant—Seized golden ornaments were shown to informant—She identified the same—Informant had given description of gold ornaments stolen from her house in FIR which was lodged immediately after incident—There is no possibility of any concoction—Ornaments were found in possession of appellant—Appellant could not explain how he came in possession of ornaments—Prosecution has proved possession of gold ornaments and imitation jewellery with appellant—Jeans Pant of appellant was stained with blood so it was incumbent upon him to explain as to why there was blood stains—Non-explanation of appellant on said point can be used against appellant—Trial Court has rightly convicted appellant for offence punishable under Sections 302, 392 r/w Section 34 of IPC—Appeal dismissed. (Paras 22, 25, 26, 31, 42, 46, 47 and 55)

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Surendra P. Tavade, J.—The appellant-original accused has preferred this appeal to challenge the Judgment and conviction order passed against him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi in Sessions Case No.38 of 2013. The appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to sufer imprisonment for life and to pay fne of Rs.5000/- in default to sufer simple imprisonment for six months. The appellant is also convicted for offence under section 392 read with section 397 of IPC and sentenced to sufer Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fne of Rs.2000/- in default to sufer simple imprisonment for three months.

2. The prosecution case unfold as under:

First informant Chetnaben Premji Vora is a daughter of deceased Nirmala Premji Vora. She was running a sugarcane juice stall near inorbit mall, Malad. She was residing with her mother at Room No.8, Nemani Chawl, Malad (West), Mumbai. Informant used to visit her juice centre at 11.30 a.m and used to return home at 11.30 p.m. Sometimes she used to return home for lunch.

3. On 4th November 2012 at about 11.30 p.m informant went to her shop. She did not visit her house for lunch. At the relevant time, one Mr.Balli was working with informant. He used to clean sugarcane at her residence and then used to bring it in the shop. At 4.30 p.m. informant called her mother and asked her whether the servant Mr.Balli had proceeded to the shop. Her mother replied that the work is not completed and hence Mr.Balli may stay for some time and then he will attend the shop. On the same night at about 9.30 p.m to 9.50 p.m informant gave calls to her mother but there is no reply from her.

4. Ultimately, at 11.30 p.m informant went to her house. The door of her house was closed but it was not latched from inside. She opened the door and found her mother lying in the pool of blood. Knife was pierced in her chest and there was deep injury on her neck. Informant removed the knife and threw the same in the room. She found two cupboards in the room were in open conditions and clothes therein were in scattered in the room. Informant shouted for help. Her neighbours gathered in the house. One of them called Dr.Kabra who examined her mother and declared her dead. Somebody called police in the room. The informant found one tooth in between sofa cum bed, she handed over the same to the police.

5. Accordingly, police made enquiry with the informant and others. Informant checked her cupboard and of her mother and she did not find a plastic bag containing Rs.35,000/- as also a pot of ornaments having (1) one gold mug chain, (2) one gold chain, (3) Two gold bangles, (4) two gold bangles (radium and gold plated). She also did not find coins of Rs.1000/- to 1100/- and imitation jewellery kept by her mother in a plastic bag containing two bangles gold and silver plated, one bangle of artifcial diamonds, one gold plated bangle, ten pairs of artifcial bangles gold plated, three malas of imitation jewellery, one necklace of imitation jewellery, one necklace of white pearls, one pair of ear ring and two pandles. Informant lodged FIR. The dead body of Nirmala was sent to Post Mortem examination.

6. On the basis of FIR, crime was registered against the unknown person. On investigation, it was revealed that appellant was working with the informant for about 2 months. He was addicted to liquor. Hence, he was removed from service. Informant had given the appellant a mobile phone but he did not return the same. On the basis of call record, it appeared that the appellant was moving in the vicinity at the time of incident. One Mr. Patel was supplying sugarcane to the appellant through his servant. On the day of incident, Patel had supplied sugarcane. The employee of Patel stated that the appellant was moving in the area. Hence, police searched for the appellant. Ultimately, appellant was found at his native place in Rajasthan at Udaypur. He came to

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