Friday, 17, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The State Of Maharashtra vs Vijay Pandurang Jadhav And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 8185 Bom

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 8185 Bom
Judgement Date : 13 October, 2017

Bombay High Court
The State Of Maharashtra vs Vijay Pandurang Jadhav And Ors on 13 October, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
                                      1                    APEAL89.2002 & 2

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

                      CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 89 OF 2002 

 1.   Vijay S/o Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 31 years, Occu. Service,
       R/o. Kautha, Tq. Hadgaon,
       Dist. Nanded.

 2.   Balaji S/o Bhimrao Jadhav,
       Age : 35 years, Occu. Agril.
       R/o. As above.  

 3.   Sanjay S/o Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 27 years, Occu. Agril.,
       R/o. As above.

 4.   Dilip S/o Digambar Jadhav,
       Age : 29 years, Occu. Agril.,
       R/o. As above.                                         ... Appellants

              VERSUS

 The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Police Station, Hadgaon,
 Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded.                                ... Respondent
                                                        (Orig. Complainant)

                                    ..........
                 Mr S. B. Bhapkar, Advocate for the appellants
                  Mr S. D. Ghayal, APP for respondent/State
                                   .............

                                       WITH

                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 267 OF 2002 

 The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Police Station, Hadgaon,
 Dist. Nanded.                                             ... Appellant
                                                       (Orig. Complainant)
              Versus




::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:52:31 :::
                                     2                     APEAL89.2002 & 2

 1.   Vijay Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 31 years, 

 2.   Alaji Bhimrao Jadhav,
       Age : 27 years,  

 3.   Sanjay Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 27 years, 

 4.   Dilip S/o Digambar Jadhav,
       Age : 29 years, 

       All R/o Kautha, Tq. Hadgaon,
       Dist. Nanded.                                           ...   Respondents  
                                                                (Orig. Accused)
                                    ..........
                 Mr S. B. Bhapkar, Advocate for the appellants
                  Mr S. D. Ghayal, APP for respondent/State
                                   .............

                                  WITH
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 270 OF 2002 

 The State of Maharashtra,
 Through Police Station, Hadgaon,
 Dist. Nanded.                                           ... Appellant
                                                  (Orig. Complainant)
              Versus

 1.   Vijay Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 31 years, 

 2.   Alaji Bhimrao Jadhav,
       Age : 27 years,  

 3.   Sanjay Pandurang Jadhav,
       Age : 27 years, 

 4.   Dilip S/o Digambar Jadhav,
       Age : 29 years, 

       All R/o Kautha, Tq. Hadgaon,
       Dist. Nanded.                                ... Respondents 
                                                   (Orig. Accused)




::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017                     ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:52:31 :::
                                             3                      APEAL89.2002 & 2



                                   ..........
                Mr S. B. Bhapkar, Advocate for the appellants
                 Mr S. D. Ghayal, APP for respondent/State
      Mr V. S. Kadam, Advocate for respondent No. 2 in Cr. Appeal No. 
                                 270/2002.
                                  .............


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

Reserved on : 05.10.2017.

Pronounced on : 13.10.2017.

JUDGMENT (PER A. M. DHAVALE, J.) :-

1. All these appeals arise out of the common judgment dt.

04.02.2002 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case

No. 47/98, wherein four accused were prosecuted for offences u/s

448, 302 r/w 34 of IPC and they were convicted u/s 325 of IPC and

sentenced to suffer RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-

each, in default, to suffer further RI for two months each, with

direction to pay fine amount if recovered as compensation to the

parents of the deceased.

2. Cri. Appeal No. 89/2002 is filed by the accused persons

against the conviction. Cri. Apeal No. 267/2002 is filed by the State

against acquittal u/s 302, 448 r/w 34 of IPC whereas; Cri. Appeal

4 APEAL89.2002 & 2

No.270/2002 is for enhancement of sentence for offence punishable

u/s 325 r/w 34 of the IPC. Since common question of law and facts

are involved, all these appeals are heard commonly and disposed of

by this common Judgment.

3. The facts relevant for deciding these appeals may be stated

as under : -

On 31.05.1997 at 12:40 AM, Jagdeo Ingle, aged 25 years,

r/o Kautha, Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded lodged a report Exh. 34 at

Hadgaon Police Station to the effect that, on the same night at about

2:00 am, while he was sleeping in front of his house at Kautha, all

four accused, who are his neighbours, came there and accosted him

as to why he was making too many complaints against them and

thereafter assaulted him with fist blows, slaps and kicks on his chest,

back and right rib. His mother had witnessed the incident. He had

suffered minor injuries and he wanted to have medical treatment.

PW6 Head Constable - Datta Jarande recorded the said complaint as

N.C. case in N.C. register u/s 323/34 of IPC and informed him that

he should approach the Court. He also issued a reference letter

Exh.35 requesting the Medical Officer, Rural Hospital, to examine

and treat the injured and submit certificate. This report of N.C. later

on turned out to be dying declaration of the deceased Jagdeo. He

5 APEAL89.2002 & 2

had gone to Rural Hospital at 2:40 am (?) where Dr. Sangvikar PW5

examined him and found two contusions one on his back and other

on his shoulder. Jagdeo had pains hence as per prosecution version

he was taken to Dr. Chakrawar at Hadgaon and to some doctor at

Umarkhed. Dr. Chakrawar did not examine him. The dispensary of

Doctor at Umarkhed was closed and he was brought back but he was

again brought to Rural Hospital at 10:20 am and on re-examination,

one contusion on right infra-axillary area of size 1'x½' with suspected

fracture of rib was noticed. Then efforts were made to take the

injured to Civil Hospital at Nanded but on the way at about 1:30 pm

he died. Then inquest and autopsy was conducted on dead body. As

per PM notes proved by PW4 Dr. Lomte, the deceased had sustained

fractures of 8-9 ribs with perforation of pleura and profusedly

bleeding injury to lung. Thereafter, FIR of father of the deceased by

name Anandrao-PW9 was recorded. The investigation revealed that

accused no. 1-Vijay and accused no. 2-Balaji had given blows of iron

rod to the deceased while accused nos. 3 and 4 had given fist blows

and kick blows. There was old enmity between the deceased and the

accused persons. The incident was witnessed by mother PW12-

Anjanabai and sister PW10-Annapurna whereas; two friend PW3-

Bhagwan and his brother-PW4 Ashok residing in house situated two

houses beyond the house of the deceased came there on hearing

6 APEAL89.2002 & 2

shouts at 2:00 am. They had seen all the four accused leaving the

spot. The accused were arrested and accused no. 1 discovered all

weapons of offence and his blood stained clothes. Those were

forwarded to CA office and CA reports were collected. After

completion of investigation, the chargesheet was submitted in the

court. In due course, the case was committed to the court of

Sessions.

4. The ld. Addl. Sessions Judge framed charge at Exh. 5. The

accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses.

The defence of the accused is of total denial. It is their case that, the

deceased had consumed alcohol and was addicted and fell down

from a bike while returning from a movie or subsequent to his

examination by Dr. Sangvikar PW5.

5. The ld. trial Judge discarded evidence of assault by iron rod

and also found some discrepancies in the evidence of eye-witnesses.

It seems that, he mainly relied on the dying declaration and taking

into consideration the nature of the acts of the accused, he held that

charge u/s 325/34 was only proved. Accordingly, he passed

conviction and sentences as referred above. Hence, this appeal.

7 APEAL89.2002 & 2

6. Heard Shri. S. D. Ghayal, ld. APP for the State, Shri. S. B.

Bhapkar, ld. Advocate for the respondents and Shri. V. S. Kadam, ld.

Advocate for respondents No. 1 & 2 in Cr. Appeal No. 270/2002.

Learned advocates have taken us through the evidence on record.

7. Learned APP Shri Ghayal arued that, there is a dying

declaration showing the involvement of all the accused. The deceased

himself had reported the matter to the police within short time.

Unfortunately the deceased could not get proper medical treatment.

The incident of assault was witnessed by his mother and sister and

also by two neighbours. Admittedly there is a strong enmity between

the accused and the deceased and his relatives. The Medical Officer

was not careful when the deceased was examined at 2:40 am and he

did not notice the major injury which caused rib fractures and

internal injury to lungs and pleural which caused his death. He

argued that, the evidence of material witnesses is consistent with

each other as well as with the medical evidence. The FIR filed by

father of the deceased is also filed within short time after the death of

deceased-Jagdeo. Hence all the accused should have been convicted

u/s 302, 448 r/w 34 of IPC and should have been accordingly

sentenced. In the alternative, he submitted that, if this Court accepts

8 APEAL89.2002 & 2

the finding of ld. trial Judge that only offence u/s 325/34 was made

out, the sentence imposed by the ld. trial judge is too inadequate.

One young person had lost his life due to assault and therefore

sentence u/s 325/34 should be substantially increased.

8. Per contra, Shri. Bhapkar, ld. Advocate for the accused has

argued that the evidence of eye-witnesses is totally concocted. Their

presence on the spot is not probable. The improvement in the story

by introducing assault by rod makes them incredible and

untrustworthy. Admittedly, there was a strong enmity between the

accused and the prosecution witnesses since many years. About one

month earlier accused nos. 1 and 3 had lodged report against the

deceased Jagdeo regarding theft of electric motor and he was

arrested and was later on released on bail. PW3 Bhagwan was surety

for him and PW10 Ashok is his brother. They are residing at long

distance and they could not have been present on the spot

immediately after the incident. There are admissions to show that

the deceased and Santosh had gone to last movie show from 9.00 to

12.00. According to the accused, while returning on the bike, the

deceased, who had consumed liquor, fell down and sustained

injuries. The post-mortem report revealed that alcohol was found in

his stomach whereas; Doctor has opined that, such injury was

possible by fall. He pointed out the major discrepancies in the

9 APEAL89.2002 & 2

evidence of PW5 Dr.Sangvikar. PW4 Dr. Lomte and witnesses stated

that Dr. Ghuge and Dr. Sangvikar had examined deceased Jagdeo at

10:20 am. There is evidence to show that the deceased was not

properly examined at 2:40 am.

9. The PM notes disclose that deceased died about 2 to 6 hrs

after his last meal and admittedly he had taken last meal on the

earlier day at 7:00 pm. This medical opinion makes the entire

prosecution case incredible and untrustworthy. The so-called oral

dying declarations are inconsistent with the medical evidence as well

as with the alleged written dying declaration. The deceased had not

given any dying declaration at all and exh. 34 does not bear his

signature. The entire prosecution story smacks of concoction at every

stage. In view of the strong enmity, the accused have been falsely

implicated. Accused no. 1-Vijay is serving in a bank at outstation,

who is also implicated. Therefore, the conviction and the sentence of

the accused u/s 325 r/w 34 is also not sustainable, which may be set

aside and the accused should be set free. The appeals against

acquittal and for enhancement deserve to be dismissed.

10. Learned advocate for respondent no. 1 & 2 in Cr. Appeal

No. 270/2002 supported the judgment and the arguments of Adv.

Bhapkar.

10 APEAL89.2002 & 2

11. After carefully going through the record and the arguments

advanced by ld. advocates for the parties, the points for our

consideration with our findings thereon are as follows :

  Sr.                 Points                                        Findings
 No.
 1     Whether the deceased Jagdeo met                            Not proved.
       with homicidal death?

 2       Whether the accused nos. 1 to 4 in                       Not proved.
         furtherance of their common intention 
         voluntarily caused hurt to the 
         deceased by fist blows, kick blows 
         and/or by rod and thereby committed 
         his murder or any minor offence?

 3       Whether the accused nos. 1 to 4 had in                   Not proved.
         furtherance of their common intention 
         committed house trespass for 
         committing murder?

 4       What order?                                    The appeal no. 89/2002 
                                                        is allowed.  Appeals No. 
                                                        267 & 270 of 2002 are 
                                                        dismissed.  All the 
                                                        accused are acquitted of 
                                                        all the charges.


12. The prosecution has examined 13 witnesses which can be

conveniently grouped as follows :

[I] Eye-Witnesses & witness on spot immediately after the incident.

(i) PW10 - Annapurna, sister of the deceased.

                                           11                      APEAL89.2002 & 2



              (ii)             PW12 - Anjanabai, mother of the deceased.

              (iii)            PW3 - Bhagwan & PW11 - Ashok. 

 [II]         Dying Declaration:

              (i)              Written dying declaration [PW5 & PW6-Datta 
                               Jarande]

              (ii)             Oral dying declaration [PWs 3, 10, 11 & 12].


 [III]        Medical evidence [PW4 - Dr. Sahebrao Lomte].

              (i)              PM report [Exh. 29].

              (ii)             Provisional PM report [Exh. 30]. 

              (iii)            PW5 - Dr. Ramesh Sangvikar.

              (iv)             Medico Legal Certificate [Exh. 32]. 

              (v)              CA report of viscera [Exh. 54].

 [IV]         Other witnesses : 

PW13 - API Shrirang Nimanwad, who has proved following documents.

(i) Letter from Medical Officer dt. 31.05.1997, 3:30 pm about death of Jagdeo (Exh. 51).

              (ii)             Report for PM (Exh. 52).

              (iii)            Spot panchanama in the courtyard of house of 
                               Anandrao (Exh. 23).

              (iv)             PM Report (Exh. 29).

              (v)              Covering Letter for sending viscera to CA office 
                               (Exh.53).

              (vi)             CA report of viscera showing no poison (Exh.54).





                                            12                       APEAL89.2002 & 2



              (vii)            The contradictions of hostile witnesses.

              (viii)           The contradictions of Shaikh Shah (Exh. 56)

              (ix)             The contradictions of Anandrao (Exh. 57 & 58).

              (x)              The contradictions of PW10  Annapurna 
                               (Exh.59).

              (xi)             The contradictions of PW12 Anjana (Exh. 60).

              (xii)            PW1 - Inquest panchanama Bapurao.

              (xiii)           Panchanama (Exh.22).


 [V]          Spot Panch :

              (i)              Panchanama Exh. 23 (PW1) Bapurao (hostile).

              (ii)             PW2-Sheshrao,   who   on   31.05.1997   at   12:00  

noon taken the deceased towards Nanded in the Jeep of PW3 Bhagwan. Deceased died on the way.

(iii) PW7 Panch and PW8 Datta panch to discovery by accused nos. 1 & 2 (Exh. 38 to 41) turned hostile.

(v) PW9 Anandrao, the informant and father of the deceased at the relevant time he was in the field. He was informed by his wife PW12 Anjanabai in the morning and he had accompanied his son while he was being taken towards to Civil Hospital, Nanded .

13. The evidence on record shows admissions and suggestions

disclosing strong enmity between two parties. PW9-Anandrao has

deposed that, about 10 years earlier there was a tenancy dispute of

one Sheshrao with Iqbal who was adjacent field owner of PW9-

13 APEAL89.2002 & 2

Anandrao. Pandurang, father of accused nos. 1 & 3 was supporting

Sheshrao and was expecting that PW9 should depose about

cultivation by Sheshrao. PW9 Anandrao did not agree and therefore

their relations were strained.

14. About five years thereafter, Pandurang father of accused

nos. 1 and 3 raised suspicion against deceased Jagdeo over theft of

bells tied around the neck of bullock. On that count, Jagdeo was

beaten by Pandurang and his three sons including accused nos. 1 & 3.

15. The third dispute had taken place about four years earlier

and PW9 was cultivating field of Shankarrao More whose field was

adjacent to filed of Pandurang with a common dhura in between.

Accused no. 3 Sanjay had beaten Jagdeo which Anandrao had

reported to the police station. Thereafter, there was dispute between

Anandrao & Pandurang regarding flowing of waste water by

Pandurang in front of house of Anandrao. Anandrao stated that

Pandurang had beaten him. Again one year earlier there was

boundary dispute between Anandrao and his neighbour Digambar

and Digambar had beaten him. Digambar is father of accused no. 4 -

Dilip. About one month before the incident, Pandurang and accused

nos. 1 and 3 had made allegations that, deceased Jagdeo had

14 APEAL89.2002 & 2

damaged their electric motor. Jagdeo was arrested and PW3 stood

surety for him. According to PW9, on 30.04.2017, Pandurang and

his two sons accused nos. 1 & 3 and 3 others had been to his house

with sticks and threatened to remove Jagdeo from his house for

which PW9 had lodged report. The incident took place on

03.05.1997.

16. Though the nature of events which give rise to enmity are

not admitted as deposed by the witnesses, the enmity is not in

dispute.

17. As per evidence of PW10 - Annapurna and PW12 -

Anjanabai (sister and mother of deceased), on 30.05.1997, at about

07:00 pm, they including deceased Jagdeo had meals. Thereafter,

Jagdeo went along with Santosh, son of PW3 Bhagwan to watch a

movie and PW9 had gone to his field. PW10 & 12 deposed that, at

about 11 to 11:30 pm, Jagdeo came back and knocked the door and

thereafter they all were sleeping in the courtyard. As per their

evidence, at 2:00 am they woke up on hearing shouts of Jagdeo as

'vkbZ esyks] vkbZ esyks'. There was one bulb illuminating in the courtyard.

They saw that accused no. 1 Vijay gave a blow of rod on the right

side of Jagdeo while accused no. 2-Balaji also gave a blow of rod on

15 APEAL89.2002 & 2

his right shoulder. Accused no. 4-Dilip then gave kick and fist blows

to Jagdeo. Jagdeo then raised shouts 'iGk] okpok'. There is evidence

that, PW3 & PW11 came to the spot along with two others. At the

same time, the accused had left the spot. PW3 & PW11 stated that

they had seen the accused leaving the spot. Surprisingly, PW10

stated that, accused had left the spot by opening the door of drawing

room. PW12 Anjanabai, mother of the deceased has deposed the

same fact. She stated that, at 2:00 am, on hearing the shouts of

Jagdeo he woke up and saw in the light of bulb that accused no. 1-

Vijay gave blow of iron rod on right side rib of Jagdeo. Accused no.

2-Balaji gave iron rod blow on shoulder while accused nos. 3 and 4

gave blows of fist and kicks to Jagdeo. She stated that, she also

shouted and asked them why Jagdeo was beaten. She also stated

that, four accused left the spot through the drawing room door.

18. PW3 Bhagwan has deposed about the previous enmity.

Accused nos. 1 to 4 are his cousins but they were residing separately.

On the fateful day at 3:00 am, while he was asleep, he heard some

voice as 'don't beat me' (eyk ek# udk) and cries of sisters of Jagdeo

from the side of house of Anandrao. Then he along with Vinayak and

PW11 Ashok went to the house of Anandrao. That time, they saw all

the accused coming out of the drawing room of Anandrao and

16 APEAL89.2002 & 2

standing near the platform of Maruti temple. He deposed that, he

identified them in the lamp burning in the drawing room and accused

nos. 1 and 2 were having iron rods. He deposed that, they made

inquiry with Jagdeo. He deposed about the assault by all accused.

PW11 has led similar evidence.

19. Further evidence shows that, PW3 & PW11 took Jagdeo to

Hadgaon Police Station. Then police issued a letter for medical

examination when Jagdeo was taken to the hospital. PW3 stated

that, the nurse present called the doctor and doctor administered

some medicine and Jagdeo had vomited the same. However, the

doctor did not admit Jagdeo. Hence, Jagdeo was brought to the

Police Station and then to his house. Thereafter, PW12 Anjanabai

went to the field and called her husband Anandrao and narrated the

incident to him. The evidence of PW3 & PW11 disclose that, again at

the request of Jagdeo, he had taken him to the Rural Hospital at

Hadgaon. Thereafter, he took him to Dr. Chakrawar who declined to

examine him. Dr. Chakrawar adviced them to go to doctor at

Umarkhed for orthopedic treatment. They went to the hospital at

Umarkhed but it was closed as it was a holiday. Then they came to

Rural Hospital, Hadgaon where Dr Dhage examined Jagdeo and

informed them that Jagdeo had a fracture of ribs and there was

17 APEAL89.2002 & 2

danger to his life. Then while they were proceeding to Nanded at

about 1:30 am, near Ardhapur, Jagdeo breathed his last. The iron

rods are identified.

20. This material evidence of eye-witnesses PW10, PW12, PW3

& PW11 needs to be subjected to close scrutiny in view of previous

enmity between the parties.

21. PW6 Dr Sangvikar deposed that, Jagdeo was brought to

him on 31.05.1997 at 2:40 am. On examination, he found following

injuries.

               (i)             Contusion on right side back 2'x1/2'
               (ii)            Contusion   on   upper   part   of   right   shoulder  
                               1'x1/2'.



 .             The   injuries   were   caused   by   hard   and   blunt   object   and 

within six hours. He deposed that, he again examined Jagdeo at

10:20 am and found one contusion on right infra-axillary area 1'x½'

caused by hard and blunt object within six hours. His certificate is at

Exh. 32 which clearly shows two different timings one for

examination at 2:40 am and another at 10:20 am. PW3 Bhagwan

has however stated that, in the second visit to Rural Hospital at

Hadgaon, Dr. Dhage had examined Jagdeo and not Dr. Sangvikar.

18 APEAL89.2002 & 2

22. After the death, autopsy was conducted on dead body by

PW4-Dr. Sahebrao Lomte on 01.06.1997 between 6:00 to 7:30 pm.

His evidence and PM notes disclose only one injury i.e. contused

abrasion on right infra axillary area horizontally placed 2 x 1 cm.

Column no. 9 shows that, the injury earlier shown as on the back was

actually an old scar. The evidence shows that, it was related to

surgical operation undergone by Jagdeo about 15 days to 1 month

earlier to the incident. The Medical Officer did not find the other

contusion shown on shoulder.

23. The defence of the accused is that, deceased-Jagdeo had

consumed liquor. The PM note shows that, smell of alcohol was

found in the stomach of the deceased-Jagdeo. There is however

admission that such smell can be found even in case of administering

medicines containing alcohol.

24. On careful consideration of this evidence, it does not stand

to scrutiny much less a close scrutiny. The post-mortem notes disclose

that the deceased died about 2 to 6 hours after his last meal. The

evidence shows that, the deceased took his meal on 30.05.1997 at

7:00 pm. There is no evidence to show that thereafter the deceased

19 APEAL89.2002 & 2

was provided food before his death. The medical opinion suggests

the time of death as between 12:00 midnight to 3:00 am on

31.05.1997. There is consistent evidence which is not controverted

that deceased Jagdeo was alive till about 1 to 1:30 pm on 31.05.1997

i.e. for around 11.5 hours after the assault. Considering the facts it

must be assumed that deceased might have taken food again on

31.05.1997 morning and this is the only plausible explanation to

reconcile the medical opinion and the evidence of eye- witensess. On

the ground of this medical opinion the consistent evidence of all

witnesses that deceased died at about 1:30 pm cannot be discarded.

25. The medical evidence in the form of certificate (Exh.32) is

highly suspicious. The incident took place at about 2:00 am at

Kautha. Thereafter, Jagdeo was brought from Kautha to Police

Station and his dying declaration Exh. 34 was recorded by PW6-Head

Constable Datta Jarande at 2:40 am. At the very same time, he was

examined by Dr. Sangvikar in Rural Hospital at Hadgaon, which is

quite improbable. Besides, Dr. Sangvikar had described two

contusions one on back and other on right side. Dr Lomte did not

notice these two contusions. According to him, there was one old

scar of surgical operation on the back of Jagdeo. He found no

contusion on right shoulder of deceased-Jagdeo. The evidence of

Dr.Sangvikar is contrary to the evidence of Dr. Lomte.

                                       20                       APEAL89.2002 & 2




 26.          According   to   certificate   Exh.   32,   Jagdeo     himself   came 

 along   with   his   relatives.     The   certificate   and   evidence   of   Dr. 

Sangvikar does not disclose that he was referred by police but

according to PW6 Head Constable Datta Jarande, he had issued a

reference letter Exh. 35. This reference letter shows only one

abrasion on the ribs and some weal marks on chest and back.

Pertinently, both these letters as well as injury certificates are silent

about assault by rod. The dying declaration Exh. 34 allegedly

recorded by PW6 Datta does not refer to any assault by rod.

Evidence of PW9-Annapurna, PW12-Anjanabai, PW3-Bhagwan &

PW11-Ashok regarding assault by rod is not supported by medical

evidence.

27. The evidence shows that, there was long standing enmity

and the accused are neighbours of deceased-Jagdeo. We agree with

the arguments of learned advocate for the accused that the accused

would not have visited the house of deceased at odd hours of 2:00

am only for causing some minor injuries by means of fist blows &

kick blows. The dying declaration Exh. 34 discloses that no accused

was armed with any weapon, which is suspicious. The certificate

Exh.32 initially shows only two injuries and one injury is shown later

21 APEAL89.2002 & 2

on. It is suspicious that this major injury causing fracture of ribs and

perforation of pleura and bleeding and damage to the lung was not

noticed by Dr. Sangvikar in spite of reference letter showing that the

deceased had sustained injuries to the ribs. The subsequent entry in

the certificate Exh. 32 was made at 10:20 am. Dr. Sangvikar stated

that, he has made it. PW3 Bhagwan stated that Dr. Dhage has made

it. There is no signature of Dr. Dhage on the certificate. It was a case

of suspected fracture but no x-ray has been produced. This injury

was noted at 10:20 but the time 11:45 is shown below the remark

column. In view of the contradictions in the PM notes and in the

certificate Exh. 32, we have a strong doubts whether the deceased

Jagdeo had sustained injuries as shown at sr. nos. 1 and 2 in

certificate at Exh. 32 and whether he was actually examined by

Dr.Sangvikar or not. It is also doubtful whether the patient was

referred or not to the Rural Hospital by PW6-Head Constable Datta

Jarande. It is a matter of guesswork that if deceased Jagdeo had

gone to the Police Station and his FIR was not recorded and his

medical was not carried out, the subsequent events of his death due

to the injuries sustained earlier would put a strong blame on the

police officer as well as the medical officer and in order to cover up

the things, it might have been shown that the statement of Jagdeo

was recorded at 2:40 am and at the same time he was referred to

22 APEAL89.2002 & 2

medical examination and Dr. Sangvikar at Rural Hospital had

examined and treated him.

28. Even if it is assumed that, the certificate Exh. 32 discloses

correct picture of injuries sustained, it is highly improbable that when

four accused persons came for assault and give slaps, fist blows and

kicks with shoes to Jagdeo, he would have received only three

injuries. The introduction of story regarding assault by rod raises a

serious question mark on the credibility on the witnesses. Besides,

Jagdeo has sustained all injuries on the right side. When four

persons were assaulting him, they would have assaulted him from all

the sides. He has not sustained a single injury on left side. As earlier

discussed, the injuries on the back was old scar of operation. Assault

by four persons even for a minute would cause much more number of

injuries than two injuries described in certificate Exh. 32.

29. The dying declaration Exh, 34 recorded by PW6 Datta is

also suspicious. Accused told Jagdeo that he had made so many

complaints against them. The complaints were given by the accused

against Jagdeo and not by Jagdeo against the accused. There was no

immediate occasion for the accused to come for assault at odd hours

of 2:00 am. Even in case of assault by rod, one would expect

23 APEAL89.2002 & 2

elongated contusions having more length than the existing one and

no such elongated contusions were found corresponding to the shape

of weapon. The dying declaration shows assault on chest and back

but no injuries were found on chest and back. The dying declaration

shows that, deceased Jagdeo had sustained some minor injuries.

there is no specific evidence whether fracture of two ribs causing

perforation in the pleura and damage to the lung will not create any

pains and anybody including the patient would not be aware about

its seriousness. It is pertinent to note that, Jagdeo was allegedly

assaulted at 2:00 am but he did not receive treatment at all upto 1:30

pm. It is claimed that, he was taken to various doctors. PW3 stated

that, doctor in the Rural Hospital did not properly examine him at

2:40 am and some medicines were given by nurse. Then there was

attempt to provide him medical help from Dr. Chakrawar who was

not orthopedic physician. He referred them to hospital at Umarkhed.

Even at Umarkhed there was no doctor. It is difficult to accept that, a

person sustaining such a grievous injury which ultimately resulted

into his death, did not get any medical help for almost 12 hrs.

30. The admissions of the witnesses that the accused left the

spot from the drawing room is highly doubtful how the accused

entered the drawing room. If deceased Jagdeo wanted to sleep in

24 APEAL89.2002 & 2

the courtyard why he knocked the door to disturb the sleep of his

relatives. If the relatives were sleeping inside the drawing room, till

the arrival of Jagdeo why they slept in the courtyard after arrival of

Jagdeo that too in the month of winter on 30.12.1997. The spot

panchanama does not disclose any incriminating signs as Jagdeo had

not sustained any bleeding injuries. There is passing reference that

he had sustained minor bleeding but if there would have been minor

bleeding it would have been certainly reflected in the certificate Exh.

32 at the time of examination at 2:40 am. Taking into consideration

all these facts, we find that the oral evidence of PW3, 10, 11 & 12 is

not trustworthy. The might not have seen any assault at all. In fact

the attack might not have taken place in the courtyard. Later on

Jagdeo might have been found lying somewhere in injured condition.

The injury might have been caused by fall as the doctor had opined

that such injury is possible by fall. Causing of only one injury in a

assault by four accused persons is highly improbable.

31. We find that, the witnesses are suppressing the material

facts and are concocting stories. In the light of strong enmity

between the parties, it is not possible for us to rely on the oral

evidence of PW3, 10, 11 & 12 or on the dying declaration recorded

by Head constable - Datta.

25 APEAL89.2002 & 2

32. As far as dying declaration is concerned, if the time permits

it is always desirable to get it recorded from Executive Magistrate and

it should be recorded after obtaining the medical certificate that the

person was in physically and mentally conscious state to make a

dying declaration. It is not known at what point of time the

prosecution witnesses realize the serious of the condition of Jagdeo

and likelihood of his death but at no point of time any efforts were

made to report the matter to the Executive Magistrate and request

him to record the dying declaration. there was no opinion obtained

from Medical Officer about sound, physical and mental condition of

deceased Jagdeo for making statement and recording the statement

of the patient as to cause of death.

33. The so called recoveries in noway support the prosecution

case. When the use of rod itself is not proved, its discovery is not

incriminating. The alleged blood stained clothes of the accused were

not sent to CA.

34. In the light of the facts discussed herein above, we are of

the opinion that the deceased might have died due to injuries

sustained in accident and the prosecution has failed to prove the

26 APEAL89.2002 & 2

complicity of the accused. Hence, the judgment of the trial court is

not sustainable. Hence the appeal of the accused deserves to be

allowed. The appeals against acquittal and for enhancement of the

sentence deserve to be dismissed. The points for our determination

are answered accordingly. Hence we pass the following order.

ORDER

(i) The Criminal Appeal No. 89/2002 filed by the accused is allowed.

(ii) The judgment of conviction and sentence u/s 325 r/w 34 of IPC passed against all the accused in Sessions Case No. 47/98 dt. 04.02.2002 is hereby quashed and set aside.

(iii) The accused are acquitted of all the offences for which they were charged. Their bail bonds stand cancelled. Fine amount, if deposited by them, shall be refunded to them. The accused shall furnish PR bond of Rs.5000/- each with like solvent sureties u/s 437A of the Cr.P.C. before the ld. trial Judge.

(iv) Criminal Appeals No. 267/2002 and 270/2002 filed by the State are dismissed.

                  [ A. M. DHAVALE ]                    [ T. V. NALAWADE ] 
                            JUDGE                                JUDGE

 sgp




 

 
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 : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter