2023:BHC-AS:24564-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY varsha CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 928 OF 2015 Shri Nitin Aganda Lade, Residing at Vasti Sakurdi, Tal Karad, … Appellant District Satara vs.

The State of Maharashtra (at the instance of Sr. P.I. Karad Taluka Police Station, Karad, District Satara) … Respondent Mr. M.K. Kocharekar a/w Mr Vinayak Patil, for the Appellant.

Mr. S.S. Kaushik, A.P.P for the State.

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

GAURI GODSE, JJ.

DATED : 11th AUGUST, 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

1. By this appeal, the appellant has impugned the judgment and order dated 23^rd August 2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karad passed in Sessions Case No. 15 of 2012, by which, he has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

- for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.

2. According to the prosecution, the incident took place on 27^th October 2011 between 11.00 a.m. to 11.30 a.m, when Prajwal (deceased) aged about 2 ½ years, was playing in the courtyard. As Prajwal(deceased) did not return, his mother P.W.-6-Nutan Nilesh Sawant, started searching for him and even went to Karad, to find out whether Prajwal(deceased) had gone along with his maternal aunt. Prajwal(deceased) was later found in the well of one, Shankar Pandurang Kadam and as such, had died due to drowning. Pursuant thereto, an FIR was lodged by PW-5-Nilesh Baban Sawant, father of the deceased and brother- in-law of the appellant, as against the appellant, alleging an offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC. On registration of the FIR, the appellant came to be arrested. After investigation, chargesheet was filed in the court of learned Magistrate, since the offence under section 302 was sessions triable, the case came to be committed to the Court of Sessions for trial.

3. Thereafter, the Trial Court framed charge as against the appellant under section 302 of the IPC to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution in support of its case examined 9 witnesses i.e. P.W-1-Umrao Baba Shinde-Panch to the Spot Panchanama dated 28/10/2011; P.W-2-Dilip Tukaram Chavan, Panch to the Inquest Panchnama dated 27/10/2011 and also seizure of clothes of the deceased; P.W No.3-Nitin Mohan Yadav- Panch to the arrest Panchnama dated 28/10/2011; P.W-4– Chandrakant Pandurang Satpute(Medical Officer), who conducted the postmortem; P.W-5-Nilesh Baban Sawant(complainant - father of deceased and brother-in-law of the Appellant); P.W-6- Nutan Nilesh Sawant (Mother of the deceased and Sister of the Appellant); P.W-7-Vinod Balasaheb Kadam-Panch to the memorandum panchnama dated 29/10/2011; P.W-8-Suraj Baban Nikam - witness with respect to last seen and; P.W-9-Ashok Shankarrao Chaudhari, the Investigating Officer.

5. Thereafter, the appellants statement was recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C. The appellant did not examine any witness in support of his defence.

6. After hearing, the learned counsel for the parties and after considering the evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge, Karad convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated aforesaid in Paragraph No.1.

7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by his conviction and sentence the appellant has filed the aforesaid appeal.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned APP for the State.

9. The prosecution case, rests on circumstantial evidence. As far as motive is concerned, the prosecution examined two witnesses in support of the same i.e. P.W-5- Nilesh Baban Sawant(Complainant-father of the deceased) and P.W-6- Nutan Nilesh Sawant (mother of the deceased). Both the said witnesses resiled from their statements and hence were declared hostile, as they did not support the prosecution case.

10. It is not in dispute, that the dead body of the deceased was found