State Of Maha & Ors vs Bapu Janaji Bade & Ors
2018 Latest Caselaw 109 Bom

                                                             Cri.Appeal 179/2004
                                       1

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

                        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 179 OF 2004


The State of Maharashtra,
through Shevgaon Police Station,
Taluka Shevgaon,
District Ahmednagar                                   ..The Appellant


[1]     Bapu Janaji Bade, age 36 years

[2]     Babasaheb Arjun Sanap, age 19 years

[3]     Sachin Vinayak Walhekar, age 30 years

[4]     Vishnu Kisan Walhekar, age 32 years

5.      Sunil Sulshiram Jarhad, age 25 years

[6]     Bhivsen Bala Sanap, age 45 years

7.      Satava Laxman Bare, age 30 years

[8]     Tulshiram Shivram Jarhad, age 48 years

9.      Arjun Bala Sanap, age 46 years

[10]    Lahnu Aba Walhekar, age 55 years

[11]    Radhakisan Bala Sanap, age 35 years

12.     Namdeo Kamlakar Walhekar, age 20 years

13.     Gitaram Salveram Goykar, age 45 years

[14]    Sindhubai Kamlakar Walhekar, age 40 years

[15]    Kausabai w/o Bapu Bade, age 35 years

[16]    Hausabai w/o Arjun Sanap, age 40 years

[17]    Indubai w/o Bhivsen Sanap, age 30 years

[18]    Asarabai w/o Radhakisan Sanap, age 40 years


        All R/o Thakur Pimpalgaon,
        Taluka Shevgaon, Dist.Ahmednagar              .. The Respondents

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

Mr P.N. Kutti, A.P.P. for appellant Mr S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate for respondent no.12 Appeal is abated as against respondents no.1 to 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 14 to 18 as per Court's orders

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND A.M. DHAVALE, JJ

DATE : 6th January 2018

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

1. This is appeal by the State against acquittal of eighteen accused

of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 364, 302, 427,

504, 506 read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 37, 39

and 40 read with Sec. 135 of Bombay Police Act.

2. The statement given by the deceased Revan Limbaji Kekan, r/o

Thakur Pimpalgaon, Taluka Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar at

Shevgaon police station on 10.12.1996 which turned out to be dying

declaration is the F.I.R. Unfortunately, the person who recorded the

dying declaration was also dead and, therefore, the F.I.R. could not be

proved. As per the F.I.R., deceased Revan aged 45 years was

agriculturist. He was also working as a labourer for sugarcane cutting.

On 9.12.1996 in the evening, he returned after working as a labourer

at Nipani, Karnataka State. He had disputes on account of water with

the accused Babu Bade and others, who were residing in the same

village. About one year earlier, accused Babu Bade and his accomplice

assaulted him for which criminal case is pending in Shevgaon Court.

Accused no.1 Babu Bade (A-1) and others used to abuse and

intimidate him. On the fateful day, at 9.00 a.m. deceased Revan was

sitting in the house of Bhagchand Khedkar. That time, accused nos.1

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

to 13 came in front of the house of Bhagchand with iron pipes in their

hands and accused no.9 Arjun was carrying a Koyta. They started

abusing and intimidating Revan and challenged him to come out and

threatened him. Revan got frightened and concealed himself in the

house but they broke open the door and forcibly dragged him out of

the house and assaulted him with iron pipes and Koyta on his both the

hands and legs. Accused nos.14 to 18, five ladies joined them. They

also abused and gave fist and kick blows to him. They dragged him

upto the house of Babu Bade (A-1) and threw him in front of his house.

He was told that they had received Rs.1 lakh for killing him and

assaulted on his both the legs and both arms and caused him fracture

injuries. His statement to that effect was recorded by A.S.I. of

Bodhegaon outpost. The same was forwarded to Shevgaon police

station at 4.15 p.m. and crime was registered at C.R.No.I-189/1996.

P.W.10 P.I. Baban Ithape investigated the same. During investigation,

the spot panchnama was drawn. The injured was referred to medical

hospital. He died at Rural Hospital, Shevgaon. The inquest panchnama

was drawn and post mortem was conducted on dead body by Dr.

Gajanan P.W.11. The Investigating Officer recorded statements of

witnesses including two eye witnesses P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7

Kantabai. The accused were arrested and during interrogation, they

gave voluntary statements pursuant to which, weapons of offence

were recovered. Blood stained clothes of the accused were also

recovered. The seized articles were forwarded to Chemical Analyst

through carrier P.W.9 Dadasaheb. After obtaining Chemical Analyst's

report, the charge-sheet was filed. In due course, the case was

committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge,

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

Ahmednagar framed charge at Exh.3 for above referred offences. The

accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined eleven

witnesses. The defence of the accused is of total denial, as according

to them, there was political as well as personal enmity and litigations

between the parties and, therefore, they have been falsely implicated.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, after hearing the

arguments found the evidence of P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai

unreliable. There was no evidence on the point of dying declaration.

He held that the prosecution failed to prove the offences beyond

reasonable doubt and all the accused, therefore, were acquitted.

Hence this appeal.

3. Mr P.N. Kutti, learned A.P.P. for the State argued that the victim

himself has lodged the F.I.R. at the police station, immediately after

the incident. IT was a brutal assault witnessed by P.W.1 Haridas and

P.W.7 Kantabai. The prosecution has examined the Medical Officer

who has opined that the injuries sustained by the deceased were

sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. The accused

have discovered weapons of offences and their blood stained clothes.

Though prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, there is reliable

evidence of police Officers and the learned trial Judge should have

believed the eye witnesses and should have convicted the accused.

4. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr S.S. Jadhavar for the accused

supported the judgment of the trial Court. He argued that the

evidence of P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai is not credible and

trustworthy. They have falsely implicated accused nos.14 to 18 and at

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

the time of evidence, they have not taken their names at all. Even in

respect of other accused, there is material variance between the

evidence of P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai inter se as well as in

evidence and previous statements before police. Their evidence is too

vague. It does not inspire confidence. Learned trial Judge properly

appreciated the evidence. Prosecution witnesses No.3, 4, 5 and 6 all

have turned hostile. The deceased had sustained only six injuries, all

on hands and legs. Three are contusions and three are fractures. The

oral evidence does not match with the ocular evidence. The injuries

were not sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. The

view taken by the learned trial Judge is reasonable and probable view

and, therefore, it should not be interfered with. On the basis of

arguments advanced, the points for our consideration with our

findings are as follows:

(I) Whether accused nos.1 to 18 formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of assembly, they were armed with deadly weapons and committed rioting punishable under Sections 147, 148 of Indian Penal Code ? .. In the negative

(II) Whether accused nos.1 to 18 by forming unlawful assembly and in prosecution of common object of assembly, committed housebreaking, abduction for committing murder and committed murder and mischief punishable under Sections 452, 364, 302 and 427

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code ? .. In the negative

(III) Whether any interference is necessary in the judgment of acquittal of the trial Court ? .. In the negative

(IV) What order ? .. The appeal is dismissed.

- REASONS -

5. The prosecution has examined eleven witnesses. Out of which,

following are the material witnesses:

P.W.1 Haridas              - Eye witness

P.W.7 Kantabai             - Eye witness

P.W.8 Dr. Gaikwad, who conducted post mortem (P.W. Notes Exh.77)

P.W.11 Dr. Tarpe who had examined Revan and given endorsement

about his physical and mental status to make a statement.

6. Evidence of following witnesses as rightly observed by the

learned trial Judge is not relevant.

P.W.2 Eknath - seizure of blood stained clothes of the deceased

(Panchnama Exh.58) - turned hostile.

P.W.3 Ashok, panch to the inquest panchnama Exh.65 formal witness.

He did not describe the injuries noted.

P.W.4 Raichand, panch to the discovery panchnama, turned hostile

P.W.5 Balasaheb, panch to the discovery panchnamas, turned hostile

P.W.6 Deepak, panch to the seizure of blood stained clothes of the

accused - turned hostile

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

P.W.9 Police Constable Dadasaheb, the carrier. He has not produced

office copy of the covering letter with acknowledgment.

P.W.10 - P.I. Ithape, Investigating Officer

7. P.W.1 Haridas P.W.7 Kantabai have deposed the prosecution

story in a very broad and vague manner. P.W.1 Haridas is maternal

uncle of deceased Revan, but younger to him and handicapped. He

stated that on the fateful day, he was sitting on the ota of his house.

That time, Bapu (A-1), Vishnu (A-4), Lahanu (A-10), Radhakisan (A-11),

Bhivsan (A-6), Babasaheb (A-2), Satwa (A-7), Gitaram (A-13) and two

three female came there. On seeing them, Revan entered the house

of Bhagchand. The above referred persons broke open the door of the

house with the iron rod and crow bars Revan was dragged out of the

house and was assaulted by all of them. Then, Revan was taken while

assaulting, to the house of accused no.1 Bapu. The evidence shows

that the said house is situated 1 Km. away from the spot and in

between, there is a river, which is required to be crossed. Further

evidence is only in respect of enmity. He deposed that Revan had

filed two-three cases against the accused over the dispute of tap

water. Earlier also, he was assaulted by Bapu (A-1), Vishnu (A-4),

Satwa (A-7), Tulshiram (A-8), Rajaram Sanap, Bhivsen Sanap (A-6),

Lahanu (A-10) and Geetaram (A-13) and with regard to the same a

complaint was filed by Revan. They had a grudge against Revan for

the said reason. He has stated that Revan was also assaulted by

chopper (Koyta). He identified plank as a part of broken door of

Bhagchand - Article 'A'.

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

8. P.W.7 Kantabai is also eye witness, but she was not present at

the spot, where P.W.1 Haridas had seen the assault. Her evidence

shows that deceased Revan was assaulted in front of the house by

Bapu (A-1), Babasaheb (A-2), Radhakishan (A-11), Vishnu (A-4). Then

he was taken towards the road near neem tree towards Bade locality,

which is about 500 feet away and he was assaulted there by Sunil (A-

5), Satwa (A-7), Tulshiram (A-8), Arjun (A-9), Lahanu (A-10), Gitaram

(A-13). She is Sarpanch of the village and accused no.1 Bapu was Vice

Sarpanch of the village.

9. As rightly noted by the learned trial Judge, there is absolutely no

evidence to show that accused nos.14 to 18 were the female persons

present and participated in the assault. There is reference of

presence of two/three females but both the eye witnesses have not

taken the names of accused nos.14 to 18.

10. The evidence shows that P.W.1 Haridas has deposed against

assault by Bapu (A-1), Babasaheb (A-2), Vishnu (A-4), Lahanu (A-10),

Radhakishan (A-11), Bhivsen (A-6), Satwa (A-7), Gitaram (A-13). He

did not deposed the names of accused nos.3, 6 and 12. Kantabai has

taken names of accused nos.1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10 and 13. She did not take

the names of six others. The evidence shows that P.W.1 Haridas has

deposed the name of accused no.6 Bhivsen for the first time in the

Court. He had not disclosed it in his statement before the police.

Omission has been duly proved.

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

11. As rightly observed by the learned trial Judge, the evidence of

both the eye witnesses is extremely vague. They have not deposed,

which accused was carrying which weapon and which accused

inflicted injuries on which part of Revan. When their evidence is

extremely vague, it becomes difficult to determine whether the

particular accused was present and participated in the assault or not.

This is more significant as P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai are

showing names of 18 assailants whereas the injuries to deceased

were only six.

12. The injury certificate discloses that deceased Revan had

following injuries:

(I) C.L.W. On right upper arm 6 x 6 x 2 cms. Above wrist joint

front side;

(II) Fracture above right wrist joint 2 cms;

(III) Fracture tibia and fibula below right knee joint 4 cms.;

(IV) C.L.W. below right knee joint below front side 4x3x3 cms;

(V) C.L.W. over right left front side 8 x 3 x 3 cms;

(VI) Fracture left extremities below knee joint left lower leg.

These injuries were ante mortem and all were caused on the

arms and legs and not on vital parts of the body. P.W.1 Haridas and

P.W. 7 Kantabai have stated about use of pipes and iron rods, but 'iron

rods' is an improvement. The fracture injuries can be caused by

pipes, but contused lacerated wounds cannot be caused by smooth

pipes. Those must have been caused by hard and blunt object with

some sharpness. In our opinion, these injuries were certainly not

sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. The certificate

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

of Medical Officer to that effect cannot be believed as no injury was

life threatening. It is quite possible that a main artery might have

been cut in the assault, which might have caused profused bleeding

and hemorrhagic shock, but nature of injuries does not disclose

intention or knowledge to assault to cause death.

13. The deceased Revan has sustained only six injuries whereas

P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai have deposed that the assault was

by eighteen persons. In evidence, P.W.1 Haridas has disclosed names

of ten accused, while P.W.7 Kantabai has disclosed names of seven

accused. If the prosecution story is accepted, then the deceased was

taken out from the house of Bhagchand and he was continuously

assaulted by eighteen persons from the house of Bhagchand to the

house of accused no.1 Bapu, which is 1 Km.away from the house of

Bhagchand. If there was continuous assault by pipes and iron rods,

large number of injuries would have been caused on person of Revan,

but there are only six injuries and mostly on upper and lower parts of

the body.

14. The incident had taken place in broad day light in the residential

locality. Several villagers and relatives of deceased Revan might have

seen the incident, but the prosecution has not examined any

independent witness. The learned trial Judge observed that the

evidence of P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai is not inspiring

confidence as they have led evidence very vaguely with respect to

assault and they have disclosed names of some persons, which might

be false implication as they are disclosing their names for the first

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

time in the Court. P.W.1 Haridas disclosed names of accused Nos.1, 2,

4 5, 7 to 11 and 13, while P.W.7 has taken names of accused nos.1, 2,

4, 6, 7, 10 and 13. There were not shown to have weapons capable of

causing contused lacerated wounds. Besides, they have not deposed

names of any lady accused.

15. We find that there is no corroborative evidence in the form of

spot panchnama showing as to how the house of Bhagchand was

broken open. The prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, whereas

P.I. Ithape has led vague evidence.

16. There is also no proper evidence that the clothes of the accused

were stained with blood or that the accused have recovered blood

stained weapons. The weapons were not shown to the witnesses and

got them identified. There is also no evidence of Medical Officer to

show that the injuries caused to the deceased could have been

caused by the weapons before the Court.

17. There is admitted evidence on record about the enmity which is

a double edged weapon. There were litigations between the parties,

which can be a cause for assault as well as for false implication.

18. The dying declaration of deceased Revan was recorded as F.I.R.,

but the prosecution could prove the same. No attempt was made to

record the dying declaration through a Judicial Officer. The bed head

ticket showing the history is not brought on record. The medical

papers do not disclose that dying declaration of Revan was recorded.

Cri.Appeal 179/2004

Large number of witnesses have turned hostile. Considering all the

facts, the learned trial Judge carried a reasonable doubt in her mind

about the truthfulness of the prosecution story and considering the

evidence on record, the credibility of witnesses and probability of the

events having taken place as described by the witnesses, we also

have reasonable doubts about the prosecution story as disclosed by

P.W.1 Haridas and P.W.7 Kantabai. There are material infirmities in

their evidence. There is no corroboration to their evidence. We,

therefore, find that the view taken by learned trial Judge is reasonable

and probable view. We, therefore, answer point nos.1 to 3 in the

negative and hold that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Hence

the order.

- ORDER -

The Criminal Appeal is dismissed.

            ( A.M. DHAVALE, J.)             ( S.S. SHINDE, J.)


vvr