Tuesday, 28, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Gangadhar Waghji Shinde & Ors vs The State Of Mah
2017 Latest Caselaw 9943 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 9943 Bom
Judgement Date : 21 December, 2017

Bombay High Court
Gangadhar Waghji Shinde & Ors vs The State Of Mah on 21 December, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
                                                            Cri.Appeal 722/2002
                                       1

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 722 OF 2002

1.      Gangadhar s/o Waghji Shinde,
        Age 25 years, Occu. Agri.,

2.      Shivaji s/o Waghji Shinde,
        Age 22 years, Occu. Agri.,

3.      Nilkant s/o Maroti Shinde,
        Age 20 years, Occu. Agri.,

4.      Maroti s/o Namdeo Shinde,
        Age 38 years, Occu. Agri.,

5.      Raghunath s/o Namdeo Shinde
        Age 46 years, Occu. Agri.,

6.      Waghji s/o Vithalrao Patil,
        Age 65 years, Occu. Agri.,

        All r/o Dhosni, Taluka Degloor,
        (All presently in jail)                      .. Appellants

                Versus

.       The State of Maharashtra                     .. Respondent

Mr Hemantkumar Pawar, Advocate for appellants
Mr R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for respondent

                                 - WITH -

                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 728 OF 2002

1.      Maroti Waghoji Panchare,
        Age 30 years, Occu. Agri.,

[2]     Permeshwar Waghoji Panchare,          }Appeal abated against
        Age 25 years, Occu. Agri.,            }Resp.nos.2 and 3 as per
                                              }Court's order dated
[3]     Vishwanath Waghoji Panchare,          }17.11.2017
        Age 22 years, Occu. Agri.,

        R/o Dhosni, Taluka Degloor,
        District Nanded                              .. Appellants

                Versus

.       The State of Maharashtra                     .. Respondent




::: Uploaded on - 21/12/2017                  ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2017 02:36:49 :::
                                                          Cri.Appeal 722/2002
                                      2

Mr S.M. Kulkarni, Advocate for appellants
Mr R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for respondent
Appeal abated as against respondent nos.2 and 3 as per Court's
order dated 17.11.2017

                               - WITH -

                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 195 OF 2003

The State of Maharashtra
through P.S. Degloor,
At the instance of Dilip
s/o Nivrutti Waddekar,
r/o Dhosni, Taluka Degloor
District Nanded                                    ..Appellant

        - Versus -

1.      Gangadhar s/o Waghji Shinde,
        Age 25 years, Occu. Agri.,

2.      Shivaji s/o Waghji Shinde,
        Age 22 years, Occu. Agri.,

3.      Nilkant s/o Maroti Shinde,
        Age 20 years, Occu. Agri.,

4.      Maroti s/o Namdeo Shinde,
        Age 38 years, Occu. Agri.,

5.      Raghunath s/o Namdeo Shinde
        Age 46 years, Occu. Agri.,

6.      Waghji s/o Vithalrao Patil,
        Age 46 years, Occu. Agri.,

7.      Maroti Waghoji Panchare
        Age 30 years, Occu. Agri.,

[8]     Permeshwar Waghoji Panchare        }   Appeal abated against
        Age 25 years, Occu. Agri.,         }   R.Nos.8 & 9 as per
                                           }   Court's order dated
[9]     Vishwanath Waghoji Panchare,       }   17.11.2017
        Age 22 years, Occu. Agri.,         }

        All r/o Dhosni, Taluka Degloor,
        District Nanded                            .. Appellants

                Versus

.       The State of Maharashtra                   .. Respondent




::: Uploaded on - 21/12/2017               ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2017 02:36:49 :::
                                                                       Cri.Appeal 722/2002
                                             3

Mr R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for appellants
Mr Hemantkumar Pawar, Advocate for respondents no.1 to 6
Mr S.M. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondents no.7
Appeal abated against respondent nos.8 and 9 as per Court's
order dated 17.11.2017

                                            CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                                    A.M. DHAVALE, JJ

                                            DATE OF RESERVING
                                            THE JUDGMENT : 8.12.2017

                                            DATE OF PRONOUNCING
                                            THE JUDGMENT : 21.12.2017


JUDGMENT (Per A.M. Dhavale, J.)

1. These appeal arises out of a common judgment in Sessions

Case No.19/2001 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Biloli on 12.12.2002 whereby all the nine accused were convicted and

sentenced as follows :

  Section                 Sentence               Fine                 In default
 148 IPC                  R.I. one year      Rs.1,000/- each          R.I. for 15 days
326 r/w 149 IPC           R.I. five years    Rs.1,500/- each          R.I.for 1 month
435 r/w 149 IPC           R.I. one month     Rs.1,000/- each          R.I. for 1 month


The accused were acquitted of main charge under Section 302

read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The aggrieved accused nos.1 to 6 have preferred Criminal

Appeal No.722 of 2002 against conviction. Aggrieved accused nos.7

to 9 have preferred Criminal Appeal No.728 of 2002 against their

conviction and the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 195 of

2003 against acquittal under Section 302 read with Sec.149 of Indian

Penal Code.

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

3. During the pendency of the appeal against accused no.8

Parmeshwar and accused no.9 Vishwanath have died and their appeal

stood abated.

4. The facts relevant for deciding these appeals may be stated as

follows :

P.W.4 Deelip aged 28 years is son of the deceased Nivrutti and

the informant. On 19.10.2000 at 7.50 p.m., he lodged F.I.R. Exh.45 at

Degloor Police Station in writing. The F.I.R. shows that his father was

cultivating land of one Bhaurao Krushnaji from Dhosni on crop sharing

basis and there was land dispute over 20 years between Bhaurao

Krushnaji and Maruti Waghji (A-7). On that day at 4.00 p.m., his father

was ploughing the said land by using tractor of Yasin Shaikh. That

time, Maroti Waghji (A-7), Vishwanath Waghoji (A-9), Parmeshwar

Waghoji (A-8), Raghunath Shinde (A-5), Maroti Shinde (A-4), Neelkanth

(A-3), Vitthal (A-6), Gangadhar (A-1) and Shivaji (A-2) came there

armed with weapons axe and kattis. They assaulted his father,

inflicted blow of kattis and axe on his father's legs and ribs and killed

him. Besides, they had set on fire the tractor brought for ploughing

operations. He was witness to the incident. Hanmant Shinde, tractor

owner Yasin and one Hanmant from Kalegaon and Gopal had

witnessed the incident, while Bhaskar had witnessed the accused

running away from the spot. On the basis of F.I.R., crime was

registered at C.R. No.118/2000 for the offences punishable under

Sections 302, 147, 148, 435, 427 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code and

was investigated into by P.W.8 P.I. He drew spot panchnama, inquest

panchnama, He got the post mortem done on the dead body and

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

recorded statements of material witnesses. He seized weapon Katti

from Raghunath (A-5) and the clothes of the deceased. He forwarded

the seized articles to Chemical Analyst. After completion of

investigation, charge-sheet was submitted in the Court of Judicial

Magistrate, First Class.

5. In due course, the case was committed to the Court of

Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli. Learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Biloli initially framed charge against six accused persons and later

against three accused persons for offences punishable under Sections

143, 147, 148, 302, 427, 435 read with Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code.

The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined eight

witnesses. Defence of the accused is of total denial. The learned trial

Judge accepted the prosecution case partly and convicted the accused

and sentenced them as referred above. Hence, these appeals.

6. Learned Advocate Mr Pawar for accused nos.1 to 6 (Cri.Appeal

No.722/2002) argued that the evidence of informant Deelip (P.W.4) is

totally improbable. It is not possible to accept that when his father

was being killed, he was a silent spectator. He also argued that as per

the post mortem notes, the deceased could not have met with an

instant death and in that case after the incident was over, P.W.4

Deelip could have taken his father for medical aid, but there is no

such evidence. Even during the entire night, Deelip did not halt in the

field when his father's body was lying there. He argued that the

recovery of one katti from accused no.5 is meaningless, as it was

recovered after two years from the incident. The spot panchnama

shows that there was no tractor. There is delay of four hours in

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

lodging the F.I.R. The conduct of P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash is

not proper. There is old enmity. There are only three injuries,

whereas nine persons are implicated. Evidence of the prosecution

witnesses is not trustworthy and reliable. Therefore, it should be

discarded.

7. Learned Advocate Mr Kulkarni for appellants in Criminal Appeal

No.728 of 2002 (accused no.7) has adopted the arguments of learned

Advocate Mr Pawar and submitted that the evidence against the

accused no.7 is vague. There cannot have been only three injuries

when the attack was by nine persons. Accused no.7 has undergone

the sentence.

8. Per contra, learned A.P.P. Mr Dasalkar supported the judgment

and argued that there was land dispute. The incident was witnessed

by son of the accused and P.W.5 had supported him. The medical

certificate shows that deceased sustained three incised wounds and

one fracture. The medical evidence is consistent with the oral

evidence about assault by axe and katti. Accused no.5 has recovered

one Katti. The prosecution evidence should be relied and the appeal

of the State should be allowed and all the accused should be

convicted under Section 302 read with Sec.149, Section 147, 148 and

435 read with Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code.

9. The point for our consideration with our findings is as follows:

(I)     Whether deceased Nivrutti met
        with homicidal death ?                .. In the affirmative





                                                              Cri.Appeal 722/2002


(II)    Whether accused nos.1 to 9 by
        formed an unlawful assembly
        with a common object to commit
        murder of Nivrutti and
        used criminal force?                   .. In the negative


(III)   Whether accused nos.1 to 9 while
        being members of an unlawful
        assembly were armed with deadly
        weapons and thereby committed
        offence under Section 148 of IPC ?     .. Not proved


(IV)    Whether accused nos.1 to 9 by
        forming an unlawful assembly
        with a common object committed
        murder of deceased Nivrutti ?          .. Not proved


(V)     Whether accused nos.1 to 9 by
        forming an unlawful assembly
        with a common object committed
        mischief by fire to destroy a
        tractor worth Rs.2,90,000/- ?          .. Not proved


(II)    What order ?                           .. Appeal filed by the
                                                 State (Cri.Appeal
                                                 No.195 of 2003 is
                                                 dismissed and Cri.
                                                 Appeals No.722 and
                                                 728 of 2002 filed by
                                                 the accused are allowed



                                 - REASONS -

10. Evidence of eye witnesses disclose that deceased Nivrutti had

sustained three incised wounds and one fracture. There is also

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

inquest panchnama Exh.31 proved by P.W.1 Atmaram. The material

evidence regarding homicide is of P.W.3 Dr. Janardhan Bhume. He

has conducted post mortem on 20.10.2000 on the dead body of

Nivrutti and noticed following injuries :

1. Incised wound on left buttock just below iliac crest, posterior side, size 10 x 2 x 5 cm horizontal in direction, with sharp edges tapering from medial to later side. It was bone deep.

2. Incised wound on left thigh posteriorly just above knee. It was bone deep muscles were exposed and cut, edges were sharp and tapering from medial to lateral side, horizontal and just oblique in direction towards knee. Size 10 x 4 x 8 cm

3. Fracture of underlying femur bone was palpable and the fracture was horizontal showing unwashable small hemorrhage at its irregular edges. Size of fracture was 4 x 4 cm

4. Incised wound on right leg laterally 10 x 2 x 10 cm depth crossing towards foot obliquely. Edges were sharp tampering towards lateral side from medial end.

11. All the three incised wound were showing signs of inflammation,

i.e. they were red, blood clots were seen at the edges and at the

depth. All the injuries were ante mortem. Those were possible by

sharp weapon like axe. He opined that the deceased died due to

"cardio-respiratory arrest due to hemorrhagic shock due to multiple

injuries with fracture of left femur bone." The viscera report shows

that it was not a case of poisoning. He, therefore, confirmed his

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

opinion. Hence, on the evidence, we hold that it was a case of

homicidal death.

12. Prosecution has examined following witnesses :

(I) Eye witnesses :

P.W.4 informant Deelip (F.I.R. Exh.45) } Eye witnesses P.W.5 Prakash }

(II) Medical evidence :

P.W.3 Dr. Bhume Post mortem notes Exh.41

P.W.1 Atmaram Inquest panchnama Exh.31

(3) Other circumstantial evidence :

Panchas P.W.1 Atmaram (Spot Panchnama Exh.32)

Seizure of clothes of deceased (Exh.33)

P.W.2 Hanmant - discovery of Katti by accused no.5

Raghunath. Memorandum Exh.38, Panchnama Exh.39

(His evidence regarding memorandum of accused no.5

is not as per Section 27 of Evidence Act. He did not

state that accused no.5 Raghunath stated that he was

ready to discover the weapon of offence Katti from a

particular place. His evidence regarding recovery of

Katti by accused no.5 Raghunath from garbage, is

admissible as res gestae but no blood was found on the

same. There is no evidence that it was weapon of offence.

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

13. P.W.6 Ganesh, panch to recovery of weapons jointly by accused

no.4 Maruti and accused no.9 Vishwanath. His evidence about

statement given by the accused is not as contemplated under Section

27 of the Evidence Act, but has stated that the accused led him and

the Police to their house and Maruti produced one axe and then

seizure panchnama Exh.50 was drawn. He also deposed that accused

Vishwanath and Parmeshwar had shown willingness to discover

weapons concealed in the house. Then they led the panchas and the

police to their house and two Kattis were recovered. Those were

washed and wiped. The seizure panchnama is at Exh.51 and weapons

discovered are articles 1 to 3.

14. P.W.7 is Shravan Shinde. He stated that three accused were

absconding. He learnt that they were in Andhra Pradesh. He went

there and arrested them. He is also witness to the discovery of axe

and Kattis from the accused later arrested (Memorandum and seizure

panchnama Exhs.50 and 51). P.W.8 P.S.I. Chavan is the Investigating

Officer.

15. It is defence of the accused-appellants that due to criminal

cases amongst the parties, the appellants are implicated. Admittedly,

there was criminal cases against each other. The land dispute was

decided in favour of the accused and certified copy of the said order

of Secretary State Government dated 22.1.1998 is filed on record. The

second appeal preferred by Bhaurao was partly allowed only to the

extent of monetary claim and decree for specific performance was

rejected on 17.1.1996. The certified copy of the judgment of High

Court is filed on record.

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

16. Thus, there is evidence of enmity. After going through the

evidence of Medical Officer and the injuries shown by him in the post

mortem notes, we agree that though it was a case of homicidal death,

it was not an assault with intention to commit murder. There are

three injuries with one fracture. The incised wounds were found on

buttock, thigh and right leg. When several persons assault any person

with deadly weapon with intention to commit murder, then the person

assaulting will select the vital part like chest, neck, head for assault

and not buttock, thigh and leg. It seems that the injuries caused were

not sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. There is no

certificate to that effect, but those injuries caused profuse bleeding

which resulted into death.

17. It is obvious that the prosecution solely relied on the evidence

of P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash to show the involvement of

accused persons.

18. As far as the recoveries are concerned, evidence of panchas as

well as Investigating Officer is not at all satisfactory. It is necessary

that the prosecutor should be trained as to how to record the

evidence regarding discovery of weapons.

19. Learned trial Judge relied on the evidence of P.W.4 Deelip and

P.W.5 Prakash to hold that all the accused in prosecution of common

object of the assembly inflicted the injuries sustained by deceased

Nivrutti and there were witnesses to the incident. Since there was a

land dispute, the assault by them was also probable. The non-

examination of material witnesses was not held significant. The

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

learned trial Judge rightly held that besides the oral evidence of P.W.4

Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash, there is no other supporting evidence

credible and trustworthy.

20. After going through the evidence of P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5

Prakash, we find that their evidence also is not trustworthy and

reliable.

21. As per P.W.4 Deelip, on 19.10.2000, at about 4.00 p.m., his

father was ploughing land of Bhaurao Krushnaji by means of a tractor.

That time, all the accused came there from crops of pulse-Tur. They

accosted him, why he was ploughing the land and they assaulted him

by means of axe and katti on leg, back and buttock. His father raised

shouts. While he was proceeding towards his father, Hanmant told

him not to go as he was also likely to be assaulted. He stated that his

father expired on the spot. The accused persons took out diesel from

the tank of the tractor and accused no.4 Maruti set it on fire and

thereafter he went to the police station and lodged F.I.R. Exh.45.

22. P.W.5 Prakash has stated that on the material day and time,

while he was returning from his land, he saw deceased Nivrutti

carrying out ploughing operations and his son present in the land of

Bhaurao. Nivrutti was cultivating the land on batai basis. He stated

that nine accused persons came there and all of a sudden assaulted

Nivrutti and to him. Accused Maruti and Vishwanath were armed with

Katti and Parmeshwar was holding an axe. Raghunath was holding

katti and remaining accused were armed with sticks. He stated that

P.W.4 Deelip was proceeding to intervene but he was not allowed to go

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

as he was also likely to be assaulted. Then Nivrutti fell down and all the

accused persons went towards tractor. The tractor driver ran away.

Accused no.4 Maruti poured diesel on the tractor and set it on fire.

23. It is obvious that deceased Nivrutti died due to profuse

bleeding. He has not received any injury on the vital part. There was

no damage to the brain and lungs. If profuse bleeding was a cause, it

is obvious that deceased Nivrutti could not have died instantly on the

spot. He would have survived for sufficiently long time and if P.W.4

Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash were eye witnesses, they would have

provided medical aid to him, but evidence of P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5

Prakash is contrary to this situation.

24. Besides, P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash have deposed that

there was assault by nine persons, whereas there are only three

injuries (incised wounds) on the person of deceased, which can be by

sharp weapon. Axe is sharp weapon, but katti will not be sharp

weapon. Considering the size of all the three injuries (1) 10 X 2 X 5

cm; (2) 10 x 2 x 8 cm; (3) 10 x 2 x 10, it appears that all the injuries

were caused by only one type of weapon. It is certain that these

injuries could have been caused by maximum three persons and not

by nine persons. Since only three injuries are disclosed, it is not

possible to accept the evidence of P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5 Prakash

that the assault was committed by nine persons.

25. The post mortem report shows that only 20 ml. of greenish

yelow liquid with no food was found in the stomach. It seems that the

deceased had merely taken morning tea and had gone to the field and

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

thereafter at some time within four to five hours, he must have died.

The evidence of Medical Officer does not show whether main arteries

of Nivrutti were cut or not. He admitted that if the main artery is not

cut, the deceased could have survived for six hours. In any case, the

deceased would have survived for some hours. There were eye

witnesses to the incident. They would have immediately taken

Nivrutti to provide medical treatment, but since he was found in the

field itself, there was no eye witness to the assault on the deceased.

26. Pertinently, P.W.4 Deelip who was in shock and grief has lodged

written report at the police station

27. There is no corroborative evidence in the form of recovery of

blood stained clothes of the accused or recovery of blood stained

weapons from the accused. The evidence regarding recovery is not

reliable and there is no Chemical Analyst's report showing blood on

the weapons.

28. The evidence of two eye witnesses P.W.4 Deelip and P.W.5

Prakash cannot be believed for the reasons stated above. Hence, the

judgment of conviction under any offence is not sustainable. In the

result, the State appeal deserves to be dismissed, while appeals filed

by the accused deserve to be allowed. We accordingly answer points

formulated by us and pass the following order :

- ORDER -

(I) Criminal Appeal Nos.722 of 2002 and 728 of 2002 are allowed.

(II) The conviction and sentence of all the accused, passed by

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli vide judgment dated

Cri.Appeal 722/2002

12.12.2002 in Sessions Case No.19 of 2001 is hereby set aside. All

the accused are acquitted of all the charges. Their bail bonds stand

cancelled. Fine, if deposited be refunded to them.

(III) Criminal Appeal No.195 of 2003 filed by the State stands

dismissed.

(IV) The muddemal shall be preserved till the appeal period is not

over.

        ( A.M. DHAVALE, J.)            ( T.V. NALAWADE, J.)




vvr





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter