Appealed against acquittal in murder case. Trial court acquitted accused due to hostile prosecution witnesses and lack of corroboration for victim statement. High Court affirmed innocence, noting insufficient link between recovered evidence and accused.
Appeal against acquittal dismissed for lack of reliable evidence and hostile witnesses.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CRIMINAL APPEALLTE JURISDICTION.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 763 OF 1997
The State of Maharashtra ..... .... Appellant. (Orig.Complt.) V/s Munna @ Munir Gaus Shaikh... .... Respondent.
(Orig.accd.)
Mr.A.S. Shitole, APP for the appellant.
Mr.Shekhar A. Ingawale, Adv. for the respondent.
CORAM: V.G. PALSHIKAR
AND R.C. CHAVAN, JJ. 12th July, 2005.
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per Palshikar, J.)
Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur in Sessions Case No.17/97 on 21.8.1997 the State-appellant has preferred this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal as also verbally canvassed before us.
1
and the learned advocate for the respondent we have scrutinized the entire evidence on record and reappreciated the same.
2
Sonawane did the investigation of the said crime. He prepared an inquest panchnama Ex.8 and on the next day morning a spot panchnama Ex.20 was prepared. The article found on the spot of the incident were seized and sealed by the police. The statement of the witnesses were recorded from time to time and the dead body was sent for autopsy. The clothes on the person of deceased produced by police constable Shri Apte were seized at Ex.9 and the blood sample of the deceased was also collected. Till then though the police were in search of the accused, they could not arrest him. However, on 14.9.1996 on receiving the information the police arrested the accused at 10.15 p.m. Near isolation Hospital Chowk, Kolhapur.
3
have turned hostile. The learned trial Judge on appreciation of the evidence as it stands acquitted the accused of the offence with which he was charged which acquittal is subject matter of this appeal. As observed by us above the prosecution suffers from hostility of witnesses to a very very large extent. The evidence of P.W.1-Bharati who is the wife of the deceased is complete, but she is not an eye witness. She heard sound and came out to find her husband lying in pool of blood with severe knife injuries. She was told by the victim that the assailant was the accused and that she has no knowledge of the assault. P.W.10-Vishal has not turned hostile and has stated that he learnt that the accused was the person who assaulted the victim from P.W.1-Bharati therefore the testimony of P.W.10-Vishal is of no use being hearse
4
prosecution therefore has succeeded in proving that the blood stains were of human blood and the knife was also having blood stains the connection between these two and the accused is lacking which could come only through the prosecution witnesses i.e. panch witnesses to the recovery of these items. The deposition of P.W.1-Bharati and P.W.10-Vishal is of no consequence in such circumstances and it is definitely unsafe to rely upon the statement of panch witnesses who have turned hostile merely because the police official who executed those panchnama says that it was executed. In any case the evidence of such link is very weak evidence. According to the testimony of P.W.1-Bharati herself several people had gathered when the victim fell at his door, yet the prosecution could not succeed in getting any instant evidence to corroborate the testimony of P.W.1-Bharati. True it is that uncorroborated testimony of any witness in such circumstances may be only to warrant the conviction but in this case one thing is clear that Bharati is not an eye witness. She has deposed that she was told by the victim. It is also in evidence that the victim died immediately after reaching the hospital. There is no evidence coming even from Bharati- P.W.-1that the victim spoke only three sentences connecting the accused to the assault. Taking into consideration deteriorating and precarious health condition of the victim it becomes very unsafe to rely upon the testimony of P.W.1-Bharati alone for
5
coming to definite conclusion that it was the accused only who was named by the victim. It is possible that he might have mentioned the name of the accused as he had gone to meet the accused and therefore surmises drawn by the witness regarding the accused being the assailant. In such circumstances necessity of corroboration is an obvious requirement, that having been absent in the instant case no fault can be found with the learned trial Judge for acquitting the accused.
6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the uncorroborated testimony of the victim's wife without hostily witnesses is sufficient to sustain a murder conviction.
Whether the recovery of weapons and blood-stained clothes made in absence of accused instigated witnesses.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The State of Maharashtra
Munna @ Munir Gaus Shaikh
V.G. PALSHIKAR
R.C. CHAVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
