Bombay High Court
Sunil S/O Asaram Bagal vs Shankar S/O Chandrakant Gore And ... on 18 April, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.759/2015
Sunil Asaram Bagal,
age 45 yrs., occu.Legal Practitioner,
r/o Vaibha Nagar, Parbhani.
Tq. & Dist.Parbhani.
ig ...Appellant..
Applicant
(Org.complainant)
Versus
1] Shankar s/o Chandrakant Gore,
age 45 yrs., occu.labour,
r/o Kumbhar Galli, Osmanabad.
Tq. & Dist.Osmanabad.
2] Uday @ Dada Manmath Shete,
age 49 yrs., occu.business,
r/o Samarth Nagar, Osmanabad.
Tq. & Dsit.Osmanabad.
3] The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Osmanabad City Police Station,
Osmanabad. Dist.Osmanabad.
...Respondents...
(Nos.1 & 2 org.accused)
.....
Shri Mahesh P. Kale, Advocate for appellant / applicant.
Shri P.K. Ippar, Advocate h/f Shri K.B. Dhengle, Advocate
for respondent nos.1 & 2.
Shri S.J. Salgare, APP for the State.
.....
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:50:41 :::
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 2 -
CORAM: R.M. BORDE &
K.L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE: 18.04.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Wadane, J.)
1] Present appeal is preferred by the original
complainant against the judgment and order passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, Osmanabad, in Sessions Case
No.181/2014 dated 8.7.2015 by which both the accused were
acquitted for the offence punishable u/s 302 r/w 34 and
120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
2] The brief facts of the case may be stated as
follows:-
a] The informant PW15 Mr.Sunil Bagal is a
lawyer by profession. Deceased Chandrashekhar
Munde was also a lawyer. The deceased was the
brother-in-law of the informant. The deceased
Chandrashekar Munde was unmarried and was
residing in Munde Lane at Osmanabad. The
deceased had 11 Acres of land at village Devalali
and there was dispute between the deceased and
one Bhagwat Deshmukh and the civil litigation was
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 3 -
pending before the Court.
b] On 1.7.2014, the informant received a
telephone call from his friend Mr.Sudhakar Munde
Advocate. He disclosed that Chandrashekhar Munde
passed away and his dead body was kept in Civil
Hospital, Osmanabad. Accordingly, PW15 Sunil
Bagal alongwith his wife and mother-in-law rushed
to Osmanabad. He saw the dead body of the
deceased Chandrashekhar. There was injury on his
neck.
c] On enquiry, the informant came to know that
the death of Chandrashekhar was due to
throttling. Then the informant also came to know
from the neighbours that on 13.6.2016, the
deceased had taken drinks in Guru Beer Bar,
Osmanabad, at 10-00 p.m. and thereafter he was
found in dead condition in a scrapped car in
front of Guru Beer Bar.
3] We have heard the arguments of Shri Mahesh P.
Kale, Advocate for appellant / applicant; Shri P.K.
Ippar, Advocate h/f Shri K.B. Dhengle, Advocate for
respondent nos.1 & 2 and Shri S.J. Salgare, APP for the
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 4 -
State.
4] We have also perused the evidence on record and
the reasons recorded by the learned Sessions Judge,
Osmanabad. On scrutiny of the same, it appears that in
order to bring home the guilt, the prosecution has
examined in all 17 witnesses. We have minutely gone
through the evidence of each and every witness. From the
evidence of PW15 Sunil Bagal - the informant, it reveals
that he has no personal knowledge about the actual
incident, who assaulted or throttled the neck of the
deceased Chandrashekhar. He arrived at Osmanabad only on
the information given by one Sudhakar Munde Advocate. To
establish the case of the prosecution, the prosecution
has examined waiter from Guru Beer Bar and one Pan
shopkeeper and his friends. PW6 Sampat Solankar deposed
that the deceased Chandrashekhar used to visit Guru Beer
Bar. However, rest of the waiters have turned hostile
and have not supported the case of the prosecution. One
of the customers namely Arjun Deshmukh PW16 has also
turned hostile. All the panch witnesses except the panch
of the spot panchanama have turned hostile. Kishor Isake
PW5 - Pan shopkeeper has also turned hostile. PW3
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 5 -
Pushkraj Wakadkar and PW4 Mayur Ingale were examined by
the prosecution to establish conversation between the
accused no.2 and the accused no.1 and as per the case of
the prosecution, the accused no.2 instructed the accused
no.1 to kill Chandrashekhar Munde. However, both these
witnesses have turned hostile. The prosecution has
examined PW8 Subhash Kachare stated to be the panch
witness to establish the recovery of the articles u/s 27
of the Indian Evidence Act i.e. cell phone and cash
amount of Rs.1600/- belonging to the deceased
Chandrashekhar. However, this witness has also turned
hostile. In fact, there is absolutely no evidence on
record against the accused.
5] On appreciation of the evidence on record, we
are of the opinion that no different view could be
possible than the one taken by the learned Sessions
Judge.
6] The appellant / applicant in paragraph no.11 of
the appeal memo has sought leave to file the appeal and
in fact presented the appeal itself, we have considered
both the prayers simultaneously on merits. We do not
find any merit in the challenge raised by the appellant.
Cr.Appeal 759/15
- 6 -
Hence, leave to file the appeal is refused. Accordingly,
the appeal is rejected.
(K.L. WADANE, J.) (R.M. BORDE, J.)
ndk/cr1841617.doc
