Bombay High Court
Ramesh Vansha Hadal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 January, 2018
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
DDR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 668 OF 2014
IN
SESSIONS CASE NO. 161 OF 2003
Ramesh Vansha Hadal
Age - 25 years, Occ. Driver,
R/o. Uplat Kondharpada,
Tal - Talasari, District - Thane,
Original accused at present
Lodged in Nashik Road Central
Prison, Nashik. ...Appellant
(Org. Accused)
Vs.
State of Maharashtra
(at the instance of Talsari police station) ...Respondent
...........
Ms. Rohini M. Dandekar, Advocate appointed for the appellant.
Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, A.P.P. For the State.
...........
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.
AND M.S.KARNIK, J.
DATE : 5th JANUARY, 2018.
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, A.C.J.):-
The appellant/original accused has preferred this
appeal against the judgment and order dated 14/9/2004 passed
by Ist Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Palghar in Sessions
Case No. 161 of 2003. By the said judgment and order, learned
Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.4000/- in default to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for five months.
2. The prosecution case briefly stated is as under :-
It is the prosecution case that the appellant
committed murder of his paternal uncle Shidwa and Rasmabai,
wife of Shidwa, by assaulting them with an axe. P.W. 3 Dilip
Hadal was the son of Rasmabai and Shidwa. Shidwa had two
other brothers i.e. Vansha and Diwal. The appellant was the son
of Vansha. The appellant used to reside in the house adjacent to
the house in which Dilip resided with his parents Shidwa and
Rasmabai. Mahadu was the grandfather of Dilip as well as the
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
appellant. He had partitioned the land among his sons. Father of
the appellant had expired and the appellant was demanding
land from Shidwa. On account of this, the appellant and Shidwa
used to quarrel. The incident took place on 3/7/2003 at 5.30
p.m.. At that time the appellant assaulted Shidwa and his wife
Rasmabai with an axe on the neck and other parts of the body
and caused their death. P.W. 3 Dilip, who was the son of
Rasmabai and Shidwa, lodged FIR. Thereafter, investigation
commenced. After completion of the investigation the charge-
sheet came to be filed.
3. Charge came to be framed against the appellant
under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant
pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried.
His defence is of total denial and of false implication. After
going through the evidence adduced in this case, learned
Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated
in para 1 above, hence, this appeal.
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
4. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant
and learned APP for State. We have carefully considered their
submissions, the judgment and order passed by the learned
Sessions Judge and the evidence in this case. After carefully
going through the same for the below mentioned reasons we are
of the opinion that the appellant committed the murder of
Shidwa and Rasmabai by assaulting them with an axe.
5. In order to show the involvement of the appellant in
the crime, the prosecution has relied on the evidence of P.W.3
Dilip Hadal and P.W.8 Janu Dadoda. P.W.3 Dilip was the son of
deceased Rasmabai and deceased Shidwa. He has stated that his
father had two brothers i.e. Vansha and Diwal. The appellant
was the son of Vansha. The house of the appellant was situated
next to the house of Dilip and his parents. The appellant was
demanding land from Shidwa which Shidwa had got from his
father Mahadu in partition. On account of this demand for land,
the appellant used to quarrel with Shidwa. P.W.3 Dilip has stated
that on the day of the incident, he, his father Shidwa and
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
his mother Rasmabai had lunch. Thereafter, at about 3.30 p.m.,
his mother was grazing goats and he and his father were sitting
in the porch of the house. The appellant then came and
quarreled with Shidwa in relation to ancestral land. Thereupon,
Rasmabai told the appellant that he should demand his share
from his grandfather and he should not quarrel with Shidwa.
Thereafter, the quarrel stopped. P.W.3 Dilip then proceeded to
the village of his in-laws, on the way he met one Vatsalabai who
told him that the appellant had assaulted his mother with an
axe. On hearing this Dilip rushed to his house. When he
returned home he saw the appellant assaulting his father with
an axe on the neck. Dilip saw that his mother and his father
both had expired. Then he went to the police station and lodged
FIR.
6. The second eye witness is P.W.8 Janu Dadoda. She
has stated that she knew Shidwa and his wife Rasmabai. While
she was working in the field she heard sound of Shidwa and his
wife. Hence, she went to call P.W.3 Dilip. She then went to the
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
spot of the incident and saw the appellant assaulting Shidwa
and Rasmabai with an axe. Thereafter, the appellant ran away
from the spot. As far as P.W.8 Janu is concerned, she is an
independent witness. She has no animosity against the
appellant, she was in no way related with the deceased and she
has no motive to falsely involve the appellant. Thus, we are of
the opinion that her evidence inspires implicit confidence,
hence, we have no hesitation in relying on the same.
7. In order to show that the appellant had the motive to
commit the murder of Shidwa and his wife Rasmabai, the
prosecution is relying on the evidence of P.W.3 Dilip and P.W.7
Mahadu. We have already discussed the evidence of P.W.3 Dilip
which shows that the appellant wanted a share of the land from
Shidwa and on account of this quarrels used to take place
between them. P.W.7 Mahadu Hadal has stated that he was the
grandfather of the appellant. He had three sons i.e. Vansha,
Diwal and Shidwa (deceased). The appellant was the son of
Vansha. After the death of Vansha, the appellant started
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
quarreling with him and his sons in relation to the land. P.W.7
Mahadu has clearly stated that the appellant killed Shidwa and
his wife Rasmabai on account of the land. Thus, motive for the
appellant to commit the crime has also been brought on record
by the prosecution.
8. In addition to the above evidence, the prosecution is
relying on the circumstance of recovery of axe at the instance of
the appellant. P.W.2 pancha witness Shankar Kharpade has
deposed about this fact. He has stated that the appellant led the
police and panchas and produced the axe. Blood was seen on
the axe. The axe was seized. The evidence of Investigating
Officer shows that the axe was sent to the C.A. C.A. Report
(Exh.57) shows that the axe was stained with human blood.
This further corroborates the prosecution case.
9. It is the prosecution case that the appellant assaulted
Shidwa and his wife Rasmabai with an axe and caused their
death. P.W.1 Dr. Nutan Dhangar conducted the postmortem on
the dead body of Shidwa and Rasmabai. She noticed five
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
external injuries on the body of Shidwa. The most important
injury which she noticed was incised wound on the neck which
was 25 cms. and cervical vertebra cut at 2 nd and 3rd level. In the
opinion of Dr. Nutan Dhangar the cause of death of Shidwa was
due to haemmorhagic shock due to cutting of neck.
10. As far as Rasmabai is concerned, P.W.1 Dr. Nutan
Dhangar noticed six external injuries. First was incised wound
on the neck due to which all major arteries were cut and
vertebral column cut at the level of C2, C3 vertebra. In addition,
there was an incised wound of the size of 10 x 1 x 5 cms. on the
skull and brain matter was seen coming out of the wound. There
were four other injuries which were noticed on the body of
Rasmabai. Dr. Nutan Dhangar has stated that the cause of death
of Rasmabai was due to haemmorhagic shock due to cutting of
neck. As far as both dead bodies are concerned, Dr. Dhangar
opined that the injuries are possible by hitting sharp edged
weapon on the particular part of the body. Dr. Dhangar further
opined that such injuries are possible by the axe shown to her.
205. Criminal appeal 668-14.doc
Thus, medical evidence also corroborates the prosecution case.
11. On going through the record, we are of the opinion
that there is sufficient evidence to show beyond reasonable
doubt that the appellant committed the murder of his paternal
aunt and uncle i.e. Shidwa and Rasmabai by assaulting them
with an axe. Thus, we find no merit in the appeal. The appeal is
dismissed.
(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
