Bombay High Court
Mahimud A. Latif Qureshi vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 January, 2021
Bench: S.S. Jadhav, N. R. Borkar
7.APEAL217.2014.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 217 OF 2014
Mahimud A. Latif Qureshi. ... Appellant.
V/s.
State of Maharashtra ... Respondent.
-------------------
Mr. Ujwal R. Agandsurve, advocate for appellant.
Ms. M.H. Mhatre, APP for State.
---------------------
CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV &
N.R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 19, 2021.
P.C.
1 Heard the learned Counsel Mr. Agandsurve for the
appellant.
2 The appellant herein is convicted for the offence
punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned
Sessions Judge, Solapur vide Judgment and order dated 6/2/2014 and
sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-
I.d. to suffer R.I. for 6 months. The appellant herein is also convicted
for the offence punishable under section 452 of the Indian Penal Code
Talwalkar 1 of 4
7.APEAL217.2014.doc
and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay Rs. 3,000/- I.d. to
suffer simple imprisonment for two months.
3 The evidence of the witnesses would indicate that P.W. 1,
P.W. 7 and P.W. 8 had seen the accused leaving the room of the
deceased Rahiman alongwith knife. Soon thereafter, Rahiman was
found to have sustained 16 injuries and had ultimately, succumbed to
the said injuries on the same day i.e. on 1/2/2011.
4 The evidence of P.W. 12 Mohd. Shaikh who was the
incharge of Sadar Bazar Police Station on 1/2/2011 shows that on
1/2/2011 present appellant had been to the police station alongwith
knife. The said knife was seized. On 1/2/2011 itself P.W. 1 Arifa had
lodged a report at the police station alleging therein that on that day
in the morning, the appellant herein, who was suspecting that
Rahiman was in illicit relationship with his wife, has caused injuries to
Rahiman and that Rahiman had succumbed to the said injuries.
5 In the course of hearing, learned Counsel for the appellant
has drawn attention of this Court to the substantive evidence of the
defence witness No. 1 Dr. Nitin Nagnath Abhiwant, who was working
Talwalkar 2 of 4
7.APEAL217.2014.doc
as Assistant Professor of Psychiatric Department of Chatrapati Shivaji
Maharaj Sarvopachar Rugnalaya, Solapur since November, 2009. The
witness has stated that the appellant was referred to him in the year
2010. The patient was brought to the hospital with complaints of his
suspicious nature, delusions, his aggressiveness and destructive mind.
That upon examining the patient, defence witness No. 1 had given an
opinion that there was substance in the complaints and that the patient
was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and hence, he was given
four electric shock. The appellant was treated as indoor patient with
the said hospital during the period 2/8/2010 to 26/8/2010. The
history of the patient, as narrated by his mother indicated that the
accused i.e. present appellant was ill since last 10 years prior to
2/8/2010. Even after arrest i.e. as an under-trial prisoner, the police
had referred the appellant to defence witness No. 1. The doctor has
placed on record the medical case record of the appellant from
2/8/2010. The said record is at Exh. 70.
6 The appellant is in custody from 1/2/2011. The learned
Counsel for the appellant upon instructions has submitted that at
present, the appellant is lodged in the open prison at Paithan and he is
Talwalkar 3 of 4
7.APEAL217.2014.doc
taking treatment from a psychiatrist. In view of the medical case
record proved by Defence witness and the submissions of the learned
Counsel for the appellant, it would be necessary to call for report from
the Open Prison, Paithan.
7 Learned APP submits that she would call report from the
Superintendent of Prison, Open Prison at Paithan, Aurangabad within
one week from today. Learned APP shall place the report on record.
Stand over to 29/1/2021.
(N.R. BORKAR, J) (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J)
Talwalkar 4 of 4
