ORAL ORDER (PER BHARATI DANGRE, J ) :

1 The State of Maharashtra has filed the Confirmation Reference No.7/2019 under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as it seek confirmation of the death sentence imposed on three accused persons (One of whom, Accused No.1 being dead), by the Special Court (POCSO Act) at Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No.342/2016, by Judgment dated 18^th and 29^th November, 2017.

We have commenced the hearing of the Confirmation Reference along with the Appeals filed by Accused Nos.2 and 3, who also stand convicted of the charges levelled against them and by the very same Judgment, they are also sentenced to death.

2 Upon hearing the learned Public Prosecutor Mr.Hiray and while the learned senior counsel Mr.Pais is to commence his arguments in the Appeal filed by Accused No.2(Criminal Appeal No.1488/2019), we could notice that the case of the prosecution as well as the defence of the accused persons will have to be appreciated in light of the evidence brought on record through various prosecution witnesses and the documents relied upon.

In light of the arguments so far advanced before us, we could notice that the spot and circumstances revolving around the spot, with the timelines being the focal point of submissions of the rival Parties, it is necessary to have a clear vision about the spot of the incident as well as the position where the witnesses and in specific PW 15 and 18 on one hand and the other set of witnesses viz. PW 4, 9, 11 were located and they deposed about some circumstances, which has been accepted by the Court to be relevant to the circumstances forming a chain, leading to the guilt of the accused persons.

The spot of the actual incident, therefore, assumed great significance before the trial Judge, who has appreciated the evidence in light of the statement of the witnesses revolving around the periphery of the actual spot where the minor girl was ravished and found dead. It is very necessary to have a clarity about the relative distances from the view point of deposition of the witnesses so as to appreciate their testimony and to ascertain whether they could have noticed the movements of the accused persons.

Since Mr.Hiray has urged before us that the cycle of the victim girl was found at a particular spot, whereas, her clothes were found exactly in the opposite field, it is very much necessary for us to get a clear idea about the spot and when we put some pertinent queries about the location of point D and the visibility of the road from point D, where PW 18 was seated and observed the Accused persons riding on a motorcycle and taking rounds, we were not given any clarity so that we could have appreciated the evidence of these witnesses.

3 In these circumstances, we intend to invoke the power under Section 310 of the Cr.P.C. which permit visit and inspection of any place where an offence is alleged to have been committed or any other place, which in the opinion of the Court is necessary to view for the purpose of properly appreciating the evidence given at such inquiry or trial.

When we expressed our intention to the learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned senior Counsel Mr.Pais and Mr.Hiremath, representing the accused persons, they clearly expressed no objection in adopting such a course of action.

4 It is a well settled position that the Appellate Court is entitled to invoke the power under Section 310 of the Cr.P.C. and the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Kushal Rao vs. State of Bombay, ((1957) 2 SCC 787) 1957 2 SCC 767, while affirming the Judgment of the Nagpur High Court, when the learned Judges had conducted local inspection while hearing the death reference, approved of the same.

5 In yet another decision in State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Het Ram & Ors., ((1976) 3 SCC 672), the object, underlying the local examination under Section 539B of the Cr.P.C. 1898 (presently 310 of the Cr.P.C.) is highlighted in the following words :

“7. It is not in controversy before us that it i