Bombay High Court
Parshuram @ Babu Shivkumar Kamble vs State Of Maharashtra on 26 June, 2025
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
2025:BHC-AS:26534-DB
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 557 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 887 OF 2024
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 557 OF 2024
Parshuram & Babu Shivkumar Kamble }
Age 35 years, R/at B.D.D. Chawl No.19 }
R.No.1, N.M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel }
(W), Mumbai - 400 013. } ...Appellant/Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra }
(through N. M. Joshi Marg P.S., }
Mumbai) } ...Respondent
Mr. Pawan Mali for the Appellant.
Ms Kranti T. Hiwrale, APP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 26th JUNE 2025
Oral Judgment : [Per Sarang V. Kotwal, J.]
1. The Appellant has challenged the Judgment and Order dated 20 th
January 2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater
Mumbai, in Sessions Case No. 562 of 2014. The Appellant was the sole
accused before the Court. He was convicted for commission of the
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. He was sentenced to
suffer imprisonment for life. He was also convicted for commission of
the offence punishable under Section 452 of the IPC, and was
sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. Both the
sentences were directed to run concurrently. He was given set off
under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C.
2. The prosecution case is that, the Appellant was having an affair
with one Alka Thoravade. Her husband was paralytic. On 01 st April
2014 at about 08:30 p.m., the Appellant entered Alka's house. Her
husband was in the house. The Appellant inflicted blows with a knife on
Alka, and then ran away from the spot. The neighbours informed the
police; they came on the spot. She was taken to Nair Hospital but she
was declared dead. The FIR was lodged vide C.R. No. 107 of 2014 at
N.M. Joshi Marg Police Station. The investigation was carried out. The
spot panchanama was conducted. The statements of the witnesses were
recorded. The dead body was sent for postmortem examination. The
Appellant was absconding. He was arrested on 22 nd May 2014 from
Goa. After his arrest, the recovery of weapon was effected at his
instance. The investigation was conducted, and at the conclusion of the
investigation the charge-sheet was filed. The case was committed to
the Court of Session.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
3. During trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses including
the eye witness, the husband of the deceased, her son, the Medical
Officer, Panchas and the Investigating Officer. The defence of the
Appellant was of total denial.
4. The learned Judge considered the evidence on record and the
Applicant's defence appearing through the suggestions and also from
the examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. The learned Judge
relied on the direct evidence and also on the motive brought out by the
prosecution. On these aspects, the learned Judge convicted and
sentenced the Appellant.
5. Heard Mr. Pawan Mali, learned Counsel for the Appellant and
Ms Kranti Hiwrale, learned APP for the Respondent -State.
6. PW-1 Shivaji Thoravade, who was the husband of the deceased is
the most important witness in this case. He has deposed that he was
staying with his wife and his son Rupesh (PW-2). Rupesh was working
in a private company. PW- 1 knew the Appellant very well. PW-1 has
further deposed that the Appellant was from Kolhapur. He used to do
some miscellaneous work and was of aggressive nature. He used to
visit PW-1's house. He used to take meals in his house. The deceased
used to give meals to the Appellant but he did not pay for that. He used
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
to raise dispute about payment of money for his food. He always used
to refuse to pay the money. There used to be quarrels on this count.
He used to abuse the deceased Alka and used to beat her. He was
initially staying next to PW-1's room, but because of frequent quarrels
he shifted in a room on the ground floor. The incident took place on
01st April, 2014. According to PW-1, he was at home and his son had
gone to work. The deceased Alka was watching T.V.. It was evening
time. PW-1 was lying on a Sofa. Suddenly, the Appellant came inside
the house and stabbed PW-1's wife on the back. She fell down. The
Appellant then stabbed her with full force. The Appellant ran away. On
hearing the shouts, PW-1 came down from the Sofa. The Appellant
pushed him, and therefore he fell down. The neighbours called the
police. The police came there. They prepared the spot panchanama.
They inquired with PW-1 and recorded his statement. He gave his
complaint. It was treated as an FIR. It is produced on record at Exhibit
- 11. His wife Alka had died on the spot. He identified the accused in
the Court. He also identified the clothes of his wife, which were on her
person at the time of the incident. He described that the Appellant was
wearing a jeans and a coloured baniyan. He identified the knife shown
to him in the Court. The knife was marked as Article - 3. In addition,
he also identified his own clothes which he was wearing at the time of
the incident. They were marked as Article - 2 collectively. The clothes
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
of the deceased were marked as Article - 1 collectively. PW-1 has
deposed that the Appellant dropped the knife on the staircase.
In the cross-examination, he has stated that there were 20 rooms
on the third floor. His room was the third room from the staircase.
According to him, his wife was running a mess, and the Appellant used
to come for meals. He knew that the Appellant was a driver. PW-1
himself was suffering from paralysis since about 4 years. He accepted
that there were many people who used to sit outside his house on the
third floor of the building.
7. The proforma of the FIR mentions that the incident had taken
place at 08:30 p.m. on 01st April 2014, and it was reported to the police
at 08:40 p.m. The FIR was lodged at 09:20 p.m. on 01 st April 2014.
The statement in the FIR sufficiently corroborates the evidence of
PW-1.
8. PW-2 Rupesh Thoravade was the son of the deceased. He has
deposed that he was staying with his parents. Earlier his mother was
doing the business of selling vegetables, but after he got a job, she was
staying at home. PW-2 was doing a job of security guard. He knew the
Appellant as he was staying in the adjacent room. He identified the
Appellant in the Court. According to PW-2, the Appellant was a driver.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
They were having a good relationship. The Appellant used to come to
their house to watch TV and used to have food in their house. The
Appellant had given money for his meals for about 3 to 4 months and,
after that, he stopped giving money. Thereafter, there were quarrels
between the deceased and the Appellant. His mother had lodged a
complaint against the Appellant. PW- 2 had seen the messages
received by his mother from the Appellant. At the time of the incident,
the Appellant was staying on the ground floor. They were staying on the
third floor. PW-2 used to leave his house for attending his work at
06:00 p.m. and used to return back at 07:00 a.m. His father used to be
at home. The incident took place on 01 st April 2014. On that day he had
attended his duty as usual. He received a phone call from his
neighbour Sakhubai at about 08:30 to 08:45 p.m. regarding the
incident. He immediately rushed home. He was residing in BDD
Chawl, N.M.Joshi Marg. He was working at Elphinstone road. When
he came back, the police were already there. They took his mother to
Nair Hospital, but the doctors declared her dead. PW-2 had seen the
messages on the mobile phone of his mother. He knew that the
Appellant and his mother were having an affair. According to him, as
his mother had stopped giving him food the Appellant became annoyed
and assaulted his mother. He identified clothes of his parents produced
in the Court.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
In the cross-examination, he stated that there were 3 floors in
their building. There were 20 rooms on each floor. Nobody came to
take meals before the Appellant came there. He had not seen any other
message on the mobile phone of his mother except those of the
Appellant.
9. PW-5 Dr.Bhatanglikar had conducted the postmortem
examination and had noticed 10 injuries. There were incised wounds
and stab wounds on the chin, mandibular region and near the face as
follows:
"(1) Incised wound of size 1 cm x 0.5 cm subcutaneous
deep. Margins were clean cut reddish in colour with
surrounding contusion seen over left side of chin 2.5
cm away from midline.
(2) Incised wound of size 1.5cm x .5cm subcutaneous
deep. Margins were clean cut reddish in colour with
surrounding contusion seen over left mandibular
region 2.5 cm away from midline.
(3) Obliquely placed stab wound of size 3 cm x 1.5 cm
x 5 cm muscle deep, margin clean cut reddish in
colour directed antero-medially downward seen over
lower part of left pinna below the external auditory
canal.
(4) Obliquely placed stab wound of size 2.5 cm x 1 cm
x 7 cm muscle deep, margins were clean cut reddish
in colour directed antero-medially downward, seen
over left side of neck 5 cm below the lobul of left ear.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
(5) Horizontally placed stab wound of size: 4 cm x 1
cm x 10 cm, muscle deep, margins were clean cut
reddish in colour directed antero-medially and
downward seen over middle part of left
suprascapular region.
(6) Obliquely placed stab wound of size 2.5 cm x 1 cm
x 3 cm, muscle deep, margin clean cut reddish in
colour directed laterally downward seen over left
side of lower back 36 cm below the external occipital
protuberance and 2 cm away from midline.
(7) Obliquely placed stab wound of size 2.5 cm x 1 cm
cavity deep, margin clean cut, reddish colour
directed anterio-laterally seen over left side of lower
back, 41 cm below the external occipital
protuberance and 1 cm away from midline, 3 cm
below the injury no.6 under column no.17.
(8) Vertically placed stab wound of size 6 cm x 2 cm
cavity deep margins were skin cut, reddish colour
directed antero-medially seen over left loin region.
44 cm below the external occipital protuberance and
7 cm away from midline and 5 cm below and lateral
to injury no.6 under column no.17.
(9) Obliquely placed stab wound of size 3 cm x 1 cm x
muscle deep, margins clean cut, reddish colour
directed obliquely medially forward seen over right
loin region, 12 cm above the right posterior superior
iliac spine, 15 cm away from midline.
(10) Abrasion of size 0.5 x 0.5 cm reddish in colour
seen over palmer aspect of centre of the distal
phalanx of left index finger.
All injuries were ante-mortem and fresh."
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
10. There was extensive internal damage to thorax. There were 2
puncture wounds on the abdomen. The internal jugular vein was cut.
The cause of death was due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple
stab injuries. The postmortem notes are produced on record at Exhibit
- 18.
11. PW-3 Prakash Kapte, was the pancha for the spot panchanama
which was conducted between 09:45 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. on 01 st April
2014. The blood was seen on the spot. A slipper of the Appellant was
seized from the spot. PW-4 Samruddhi Bhogale was the pancha for the
inquest panchanama, which is produced on record at Exhibit-16.
Besides these two main panchanamas, the clothes of the deceased and
the clothes of PW-1 Shivaji Thoravade were seized under different
panchanamas.
12. PW-7 Santosh Jadhav, was the photographer who had taken the
photographs of the scene and of the dead body.
13. PW- 6 Swapnil Kamble, was the pancha for recovery of the knife
at the instance of the Appellant. It was recovered on 22 nd May 2014
from a house near the railway line at Lower Parel. It was concealed on
an air-conditioning unit.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
14. PW-8 Pevekar was examined by the prosecution as the former
employer of the Appellant. PW-8 was having his business of Tours and
Travels. The Appellant was working with him as a cleaner in the past.
However, this witness had turned hostile and nothing much turns on
his evidence.
15. PW-10 Vandana Ambike was a housemaid working with a family
at Nepean Sea Road. According to her, the Appellant was working with
that family for about 4 to 5 days. She was called to the Police Station on
5th April 2014. She deposed that, prior to the day when she was called
to the Police Station, about 2 to 3 days earlier the Appellant had called
her many times. He was asking for Rs.500/- and he had told her that
he did not have food for 2 to 3 days. She had given him the money.
The prosecution has led the evidence that, after that the Appellant
had gone to Goa and was working there.
16. Other witnesses are the police witnesses. PW-9 ASI, Dattatray
Naik was on duty in the mobile van. On 1st April 2014, at about 08:48
p.m, he received a wireless message about the incident in B.D.D. Chawl.
He immediately rushed to the spot at around 08:54 p.m. and he saw
the dead body lying in a pool of blood. He then took the dead body to
Nair Hospital. The doctors had declared Alka to be dead.
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
17. PW-11 PSI- Sachin Shikhare was the first Investigating Officer.
He had conducted the initial part of the investigation including
conducting the spot panchanama and the inquest panchanama. He had
recorded the statements of witnesses including that of PW- 1. He had
sent the dead body for postmortem examination.
18. PW-12, PI - Rajendra Nikam was the second Investigating
Officer. He took search for the accused. DCB CID Unit 2 found the
accused on 21st May 2014 and they handed over the Appellant to him.
On 22nd May 2014, the Appellant showed his willingness to show the
place where he had concealed the knife. Pursuant to that statement, he
was taken to the building, from there he took out the knife kept on an
AC unit. PW- 12 sent the Articles for C.A. examination.
19. PW-13, API- Avinash Kathekar was attached to DCB CIT Unit- 2,
Mumbai. He had effected the arrest of the Appellant. Their Unit
received a secret information, that the Appellant was doing a job at a
tea stall in Goa. Their team went to Goa and arrested the Appellant.
His search was taken. The Articles on his person were seized. During
his physical search, PW-13 found a tattoo on his right wrist with the
name of the deceased. The Appellant's brother was informed about the
arrest. The arrest panchanama was conducted. It is produced on
record at Exhibit-39. During the personal search of the Appellant, PAN
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
Card, Club Membership Card, Debit Card, Railway Pass and one chit in
the name of deceased were seized.
20. The C.A. Report is produced on record but it does not throw
much light on the prosecution case. The C.A. Report is produced at
Exhibit-35 collectively. This in short is the evidence led by the
prosecution.
21. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the
evidence led by the prosecution is not reliable. Though there is direct
evidence of PW- 1, his evidence is not reliable. His story does not
corroborate to the prosecution case. According to PW-1, while going
away the assailant had dropped the murder weapon on the staircase,
however, it is the specific case of the prosecution that the murder
weapon i.e. the knife was recovered at the instance of the Appellant
only on 22nd May 2014, after he was brought back to Mumbai from Goa.
He submitted that the prosecution has not established the motive
behind the commission of the offence. The prosecution has not
established that either the Appellant was having an affair with the
deceased, and out of that relationship, due to some grudge, this offence
was committed or because of some monetary dispute this assault was
caused. Neither PW-1 nor PW-2 have given any specific reason
consistent with each other as to why this offence was committed. He
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
submitted that the evidence shows that the room of the deceased was
surrounded by many other rooms and there were people outside the
room, but nobody else was examined by the prosecution to support the
case of PW-1.
22. There is no C.A. Report supporting the prosecution case that the
knife recovered at the instance of the Appellant had blood stains
matching the blood group of the deceased. He therefore submitted that
the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
23. Learned APP, on the other hand submitted that, PW-1 was the
most natural witness who had seen the actual assault. The incident had
taken place inside the house and, therefore, the others could not have
seen the incident and, hence, the defence cannot derive any benefit for
not examining any other witness from the locality. However, the
evidence shows that the persons in the neighbourhood had
immediately informed the police. There is no infirmity in the evidence
of PW-1, therefore this can be the sole basis for recording the
conviction of the Appellant. This version is supported on material
aspects by PW-2 who had given the history and also about the quarrels
between the deceased and the Appellant. The conduct of the Appellant
of absconding without informing anybody also points to his guilt. The
Appellant was arrested from Goa and some chit involving the deceased
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
was found from him. The name of the deceased was tattooed on his
wrist. It all corroborates the version of PW-1 and PW-2.
24. We have considered these submissions. As submitted by both
the learned Counsel, the most important witness in this case is PW-1,
therefore, his evidence will have to be considered minutely. We have
already referred to his deposition. He is the most natural witness. He
was the husband of the deceased. He was paralytic and, therefore, was
unable to move from the house. He was very much present in the
house when the incident took place. All the other witnesses from the
locality have also spoken about his presence in the house. When the
police came to the spot, at that time also PW-1 was in the house. He
could not have moved without any help of anybody else, therefore his
presence in the house is beyond any doubt. The dead body of the
deceased was also in the house, therefore, there is no reason to raise
any suspicion on the veracity of PW-1's evidence that he was in the
house, when the incident took place. In that situation when PW-1 has
described the incident in detail involving the present Appellant, in our
opinion, the prosecution is right in relying on his evidence. His
deposition is supported by the medical evidence as well. PW-1 has
described the manner of assault and part of the body of the deceased
where the stab injuries were inflicted. All these injuries are consistent
with the postmortem notes and the evidence of the Medical Officer-
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
PW-5. We see absolutely no reason as to why PW-1's evidence cannot
be relied upon.
25. PW-2, Rupesh has also corroborated the version of PW-1. PW-2
had gone to attend his duty, but he has deposed that PW-1 was in the
house when he had left for his duty. He has in fact deposed that his
parents were staying at home when he used to go to attend his work.
He had received a phone call at about 08:30 p.m. and then he had
rushed back home. By the time, the police were already there. The
evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 is further corroborated by the prompt
lodging of the FIR. The police had immediately recorded the statement
of PW-1, and as mentioned earlier, the FIR was actually lodged at
09:20 p.m. The proforma mentions that the police station had received
the information at 08:40 p.m. Therefore, there was no scope to
deliberate on the fact and to manipulate the facts to lodge a false FIR.
The FIR was lodged immediately. Hence, it cannot be said that PW-1
after due thought and deliberation had implicated the Appellant falsely.
26. Though Mr. Mali, learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted
that, according to PW-1, the Appellant had dropped the knife on the
staircase, this part of the evidence cannot be seriously considered in
favour of the Appellant. PW-1 was inside the house. He was a paralytic
patient and it was difficult for him to move out and, therefore, he could
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
not have seen whether the Appellant had dropped the weapon while
going away from the house. The staircase was at some distance because
there were at least three rooms between the room of the PW-1 and the
staircase. This little discrepancy does not go to the root of the matter.
On the other hand, the weapon was recovered at the instance of the
Appellant on 22nd May 2014. Though there is no conclusive C.A. Report
connecting the murder weapon with the blood of the deceased, in the
facts of this case, the main evidence is in the form of direct evidence of
PW-1, who has described the incident in detail. The prosecution has
proved its case beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of the evidence of
PW-1 and PW-2. In any case their evidence is further supported by the
fact that the Appellant was arrested after about more than a month
from Goa. PW-10 has deposed that, after the incident the Appellant
had sought help of Rs.500/- from her. The evidence of PW-2 that his
mother- the deceased was having an affair with the Appellant is
supported by the circumstances when the Appellant was arrested. The
name of the deceased was found tattooed on his wrist. A chit in her
name was also found with him. So there is direct connection between
the Appellant and the deceased as is deposed by PW-2. According to
PW-1 and PW-2, there used to be frequent quarrels between the
Appellant and the deceased. The incident in question was a result of
those quarrels. The medical evidence shows that there were many
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
908 Apeal.557.2024.doc
blows inflicted by the Appellant on the deceased. This is corroborated
by the description of the incident given by PW-1.
27. As a result of the above discussion, we find that the learned trial
Judge has given acceptable and cogent reasons in convicting the
Appellant. The prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable
doubt. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned Judgment and
Order. We find no merit in the Appeal. Consequently, the Appeal is
dismissed. With the dismissal of the Appeal, the connected Interim
Application is also dismissed.
[MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.] [SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.]
Digitally
signed by
RUSHIKESH
RUSHIKESH VISHNU
VISHNU PATIL
PATIL Date:
2025.07.03
15:12:05
+0530
26th June 2025
R.V.Patil
