Pradeeo Bipul Goswami Vs the State of Maharashtra

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.254 OF 2006

¶4

 Pradeep Vipul Goswami, )
 Convict Prisoner )
 No.C/3285, Kolhapur )
 Central Prison, Kalamba,)
 Dist.Kolhapur. ) ..APPELLANT.
 (Orig.Accused)
 Versus
 The State of Maharashtra) .RESPONDENT.

¶5

 . . .
 Mr.A.G.Toraskar, Adv. appointed for the Appellant.
 Mr.P.S.Hingorani, APP, for the Respondent-State.

¶6

 . . .
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ.

¶7

DATED : APRIL 04, 2008.

¶8

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.) :

¶9

 . Through this Appeal, the appellant i.e.
 original accused has challenged the judgment and
 order dated 29th August, 2005 passed by the
 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay
 in Sessions Case No.696 of 2003. By the said
 judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge
 convicted the appellant under Section 302 of
 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to R.I. for
 life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-in default R.I.
 for one year.

¶10

:2:

¶11

 2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as
 under :

¶12

 . The appellant was married to deceased
 Stella. Stella was working with Thermax Company
 as a Receptionist. Thermax Company had one Guest
 House at Advent Building, 1st Floor, Flat No.14,
 Jagannath Peth Marg, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai. PW-3
 Montu Prasad Yadav was working in the Guest House
 as Caretaker. PW-4 Unnikrishnan was also a
 employee of Thermax Company and he was residing at
 the said Guest House at the relevant time. Stella
 used to do the work of booking of Guest House of
 the Company. Hence she was known to PW-3 Montu
 Yadav who was Caretaker of the said Guest House.

¶13

 . On 27th June, 2003 Montu Yadav was present
 in Company Guest House. On that day, at about
 5:15 p.m. Stella came with one person whom she
 introduced to Montu Yadav as her husband. Both of
 them sat down in the hall of the Guest House.
 Thereafter Montu Yadav offered them tea.
 Thereafter Stella requested Montu Yadav to open

¶14

:3:

¶15

 one room in the guest house as she wanted to
 change her clothes. Accordingly Montu Yadav
 opened room No.1 of the Guest House for Stella and
 her husband. Thereafter, Stella and her husband
 went into the room. In the meanwhile, PW-4
 Unnikrishnan came to the guest house and he was
 watching T.V. in the hall. PW-4 Unnikrishnan
 told Montu that husband of Stella was asking for
 cordless phone, hence Montu Yadav gave cordless
 phone to Stella’s husband i.e. the accused. The
 accused went into the room with the cordless
 phone. Within few minutes, he came out and he
 asked Montu Yadav to speak to PW-5 Girish Halbe on
 phone. PW-5 Girish enquired with Montu as to what
 happened whereupon Montu told him that he would
 enquire about what had happened. However, the
 accused took the phone from Montu. Montu Yadav
 found that the neck of Stella was cut-off and the

¶16

 accused had also sustained some injuries. Within
 short time, PW-5 Girish reached the Guest House.
 PW-3 Montu Yadav informed him that the accused had
 committed murder of Stella. One napkin and knife
 (Article 12) was found at the spot. Thereafter
 PW-3 Montu lodged a complaint. Investigation

¶17

:4:

¶18

 commenced. After completion of investigation, the
 case came to be committed to the Court of Session.

¶19

 3. The charge came to be framed against the
 appellant under Section 302 of IPC. The appellant
 pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed
 to be tried. His defence is that of total denial
 and false implication. After going through the
 evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned
 Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the
 appellant, as stated in Para 1 above. Hence this
 Appeal.

¶20

 4. We have heard Mr.Toraskar learned Advocate
 appointed for the appellant and Mr.Hingorani
 learned APP for the respondent-State. We have
 also perused the judgment and order passed by the
 learned Sessions Judge as well as the record in
 the present case. After carefully considering the
 matter, we are of the opinion that this Appeal
 deserves to be dismissed.

¶21

 5. The evidence of PW-9 Dr.Vinod Agrawal
 clearly shows that Stella died a homicidal death.

¶22

:5:

¶23

 Dr.Agrawal conducted the post-mortem. He found

¶24

 the following injuries on the body of Stella :

¶25

 (1) Incised wound, neck, base of jaw
 horicontal 11 X 3 cm. edges sharp from
 one sterno cleido mastoid to other
 tailing to right, skin, windpipe,
 foodpipe, jugular vein, carotid artery
 are cut completely. Situated above
 thyroid cartilage.

¶26

 (2) Incised wound 2" below xiphisternun
 just left of mid line 3 X 1 cm. edges
 sharp muscle deep.

¶27

 (3) Incised wound left 7th inter
 coastals space, interior axillary lying
 3 X 1 cm. edges sharp muscle deep.

¶28

 (4) Incised wound left forearm upper
 1/3rd lateral 8 X 3 cm. bone deep
 edges sharp.

¶29

 (5) Incised wound left forearm supero
 medial 1 X 1/2 cm. muscle deep edges

¶30

:6:

¶31

 sharp.

¶32

 (6) Stab 4" below tip of left scapula 2
 X 1 cm. edges sharp upto inter postal
 muscle. Cavity not reached.

¶33

 (7) Stab 5" to right of injury no.6 2 X

¶34

 1 cm. edges sharp muscle deep.

¶35

 6. According to the Doctor, the death was due
 to haemorrhage and shock due to the injuries
 mentioned in column No.17. PW-9 Dr.Vinod Agrawal
 has gone on record saying that all the injuries
 were possible by a weapon like knife. All these
 fact clearly establish that the death of deceased
 Stella is undoubtedly a homicidal death. We may
 also state here that it is nobody’s case that the
 death was either accidental or suicidal. The
 evidence on record shows that the dead body was
 lying in a pool of blood. The weapon of assault
 i.e. knife (Article 12) was also lying by the
 side of the dead body. Considering all these
 facts, we have absolutely no hesitation in coming
 to the conclusion that the death of Stella was a

¶36

:7:

¶37

 homicidal death.

¶38

 7. In view of the fact that the prosecution

¶39

 has established the death of Stella was a
 homicidal death, it is required to be seen as to
 whether the nexus between the accused and the
 homicidal death has been established or not by the
 prosecution.

¶40

 8. There is no eye witness in the present
 case. However, the prosecution has relied upon
 the evidence of three witnesses i.e. PW-3 Montu
 Yadav, PW-4 Unnikrishnan and PW-5 Girish Halbe in
 order to establish the nexus between the accused
 and the death of Stella.

¶41

 9. PW-5 Girish Halbe has stated that Stella
 was working as a Receptionist in Thermax Company.
 On 27th June, 2006 Stella asked his permission to
 leave early as she wanted to attend a marriage.
 The evidence of PW-3 Montu shows that Stella and
 the accused went to the Company’s Guest House.
 She introduced the person who was accompanying her
 as her husband i.e. present appellant. On

¶42

:8:

¶43

 reaching the Guest House she asked PW-3 Montu
 Yadav to open one room for her so that she could
 change her clothes. Accordingly PW-3 Montu Yadav
 opened room No.1 and Stella and her husband both
 went into room No.1. After some time, PW-4
 Unnikrishnan who was residing in room No.4 of the
 Guest House, reached there. Some time thereafter
 the accused came out of room No.1 and asked for a
 phone. As Montu Yadav at that time was inside the
 kitchen, PW-4 Unnikrishnan called housekeeper
 Montu Yadav and Montu Yadav then handed over one
 cordless phone to the accused. The accused then
 again entered into room No.1 in presence of PW-3
 Montu and PW-4 Unnikrishnan. From the said
 cordless phone the accused contacted PW-5 Girish
 Halbe and told him that he is Stella’s husband,
 and that he had committed a mistake and he
 desperately urged Girish to come to the Guest
 House immediately. The said conversation which
 took place in Hindi is as under : "Mai Stella Ka
 Husband Baat Kar Raha Hun, Muzhase Kuch Galati Ho
 Gai Hai, Aap Church Guest House Me Aa Jaieye".
 When PW-5 Girish Halbe tried to ask him as to what
 happened, the accused refused to say anything at

¶44

:9:

¶45

 that point of time. Girish then enquired with
 Montu as to what happened, whereupon Montu said
 that he will find out and inform him. Thereafter
 Girish reached to the Guest House and found Stella
 dead and the accused was also in the Guest House.

¶46

 10. The evidence of PW-3 Montu Yadav, PW-4
 Unnikrishnan and PW-5 Girish Halbe establishes
 that at the relevant time, the appellant was
 present in the company Guest House. In view of
 the fact that the alleged incident had taken place
 inside room no.1 of the Guest House, there is
 absolutely no possibility that anybody could
 actually witnessed the alleged commission of
 offence. The fact that the accused entered into
 room no.1 in the presence of Montu Yadav, the fact
 that the accused came out of room in presence of
 PW-4 Unnikrishnan and thereafter Montu Yadav
 handed over the cordless phone to the accused and
 then the entry of the accused into room no.1 in
 the presence of PWs.3 & 4 which is followed by the
 homicidal death of Stella, clearly establishes
 that these are absolutely strong circumstances
 which establish that the accused alone is the

¶47

 :10:

¶48

 person who committed the murder of his wife.

¶49

 11. It is also pertinent to note that the
 evidence of PW-10 Dr.Meena Agrawal also

¶50

 establishes the fact that the accused had received
 two fresh injuries on his palm at the relevant
 time. True that those injuries must have been
 caused by weapon of assault but possibility is
 that there could be some resistance from Stella
 when she received the injuries and that could be
 the reason why the accused also must have received
 injury, though in minor in nature. The accused
 has furnished no explanation for the said
 injuries. Moreover, it is pertinent to note that
 the accused has admitted that he is the husband of

¶51

 Stella and that he had gone with Stella to the
 Guest House at the relevant time. However, though
 he was at the Guest House with her, the accused
 has not furnished any explanation as to how Stella
 died. He has not discharged the burden under
 Section 106 of the Evidence Act. This silence on
 the part of the accused would also go against him.

¶52

 12. Admittedly, the accused is the husband of

¶53

 :11:

¶54

 deceased Stella, and it is also proved that he was
 present in the Guest House at the relevant time.
 It has been established beyond reasonable doubt
 that the accused was present along with his wife
 Stella at the relevant time and both of them were
 in room No.1 which was closed from inside. PW-3
 Montu Prasad Yadav, the person had seen Stella
 entering into the room along with the accused.
 Thus, the accused was last seen in company of his
 wife Stella. They entered into room no.1 of the
 Company Guest House. Within minutes thereafter
 Stella was found dead. The weapon of assault was
 found near the dead body. Chemical Analyser’s
 report lends corroboration to the prosecution
 case. Looking to the evidence on record, we have
 no hesitation to reach the conclusion that it was
 the appellant-accused and the appellant-accused
 alone who committed the murder of Stella.

¶55

 13. In the result the appeal is dismissed. The
 conviction and sentence dated 29th August, 2005
 recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
 Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No.696 of 2003 is
 confirmed. The appellant is in jail. He shall

¶56

 :12:

¶57

 serve out the sentence.

¶58

(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)

Pradeeo Bipul Goswami v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeeo Bipul Goswami v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kulappa Vithal Teli Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramesh Govind Thakur Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Nityanand @ Nitu Ganpat Yadav and Ors.

Vicky Ganpat Lad Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankar Bhawanji Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balu Barku Hilam Vs the State of Maharashtra