Dismissed

Mujamil Huissein Shabbir Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Apr 2018APEAL/161/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed three criminal appeals. The Court upheld convictions under IPC Sections 302, 364, and 120-B, finding sufficient evidence from an approver, recovery of blood-stained articles, and consistent testimony to prove conspiracy for kidnapping and murder.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed; original conviction and sentence upheld.

Mujamil Huissein Shabbir Ahmed Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 726 OF 2014

¶5

Shahid Akhtar @ Raju Shafique Ahmed

¶6

Aged about 29 Years, R/o. Tanjim Nagar, Lane No. 2, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik

¶7

(At present lodged in Kolhapur Central Prison)

.. Appellant

(Org. Accused No. 1)

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

¶12

(Through Police Inspector, Ayesha Nagar Police Station, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik [C.R. No. I-58 of 2010] ) .. Respondent

¶13

WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 421 OF 2014

¶14

Sajid Akhtar Shafique Ahmed

¶15

Age 22 Years, Occ. : Weaver, Residing at Gulshan-e-Ameen, Gulab Park, Plot No.19, Survey No. 98, Behind Old Agra Road, Malegaon, Dist. Nashik.

¶16

Appellant (Org. Accused No. 2)

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Maharashtra

¶19

(Through Ayesha Nagar Police Station), Malegaon, Dist. Nashik

¶20

.. Respondent

¶21

jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 28

¶22

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶23

WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2014

¶24

Mujamil Hussein Shabbir Ahmed

¶25

Age : 32 Years, Occ. : Labour, R/o. Bismilabad, Near Factory of Shakeel Member, Malegaon, Tal. Malegaon, Dist. Nashik.

¶26

(At present lodged in Nashik Road Central Prison)

.. Appellant

(Org. Accused No. 3

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

¶31

Ayesha Nagar Police Station, Malegaon, Tal. Malegaon, Dist. Nashik.

¶32

.. Respondent

¶33

Appearances

¶34

Mrs. Nasreen S.K. Ayubi	Advocate (appointed) for the Appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 726/2014
Mr. Mahendra N. Sandhyanshiv	Advocate for the Appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 161/2014
Mrs. Aisha M. Z. Ansari	Advocate for the Appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 421/2014
Mr. Arfan Sait	APP for the State

¶35

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, Acting C.J. &

¶36

M.S. SONAK, J.

¶37

DATE : APRIL 9, 2018.

¶38

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, A.C.J.] :

¶39

Criminal Appeal No. 726 of 2014 is preferred by the

¶40

appellant-original accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar @ Raju

¶41

jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 28

¶42

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶43

Shafique Ahmed, Criminal Appeal No. 421 of 2014 is preferred by the appellant-original accused No. 2 Sajid Shafique Ahmed and Criminal Appeal No. 161 of 2014 is preferred by the appellant-original accused No. 3 Mujamil against the Judgment and Order dated 1.1.2014 passed by the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-2 & Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2011. By the

¶44

said Judgment and Order, the learned Sessions Judge

¶45

convicted and sentenced each of the appellants as under:-

¶46

Convicted u/S	Sentenced to
302 r/w 34 of IPC	Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for one year.
364 r/w 34 of IPC	R.I. for 10 Years and fine of Rs. 5000/- , in default to suffer R.I. for six months.
120-B r/w 34 of IPC	Life Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to suffer R.I. for six months.

¶47

The learned Sessions Judge directed that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

¶48

Hereinafter, for the sake of convenience, all the three

¶49

appellants will be referred to by their first name.

¶50

jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 28

¶51

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶52

The prosecution case briefly stated, is as under:

¶53

(a) Deceased Abdul Rehman was residing with his

¶54

wife, sons and daughters at Islampur in Malegaon, Nasik. PW 1 Abdul Hannan was the son of Abdul Rehman. PW 14 Abdul Rehan is also the son of Abdul Rehman. Abdul Rehman was a tailor by profession. He had his tailoring shop near Mosim Ice Factory on Ayesha Nagar Road in Malegaon, Nasik. Abdul Rehman also used to do social work.

¶55

(b) Accused No. 1 Shahid was married to PW 10

¶56

Rizwana. There was a dispute between accused No. 1 Shahid and his wife Rizwana. Abdul Rehman was representing the side of Rizwana. Due to this, accused No. 1 Shahid was angry with Abdul Rehman. Accused No. 2 Sajid is the brother of accused No. 1 Shahid. Accused No. 3 Mujamil is the friend of accused No. 1 Shahid. As accused No. 1 Shahid was angry with Abdul Rehman on

¶57

jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 28

¶58

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶59

account of Abdul Rehman interfering in his matrimonial dispute, he entered into conspiracy with accused No. 2 Sajid and accused No. 3 Mujamil. Pursuant to the said conspiracy on 23.11.2010 at about 9.00 p.m., when Abdul Rehman was returning home from his tailoring shop, these three accused with common intention

¶60

abducted Abdul Rehman in an auto rickshaw and thereafter, murdered him.

¶61

(c) The FIR in the present case was lodged by PW 1 Abdul Hannan, the son of Abdul Rehman. Thereafter, investigation commenced. The dead body of Abdul Rehman was sent for postmortem.

¶62

After completion of investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed.

¶63

Charge came to be framed against the appellants -

¶64

original accused Nos. 1 to 3 and co-accused Nos. 4 and 5

¶65

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶66

5 of 28

¶67

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶68

under Sections 120-B, 364 r/w 34 of IPC and 302 r/w 34 of IPC. All the appellants and co-accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge and claimed to be tried. Their defence was that of total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted accused Nos. 4 and 5 of all the offences but convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated in

¶69

paragraph 1 above, hence, their appeals against conviction and sentence.

¶70

We have heard the learned Advocates for the appellants and the learned APP for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that the appellants entered into criminal conspiracy and pursuant thereto kidnapped Abdul Rehman and thereafter committed his murder.

¶71

jfoanz vkacsjdj 6 of 28

¶72

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶73

In order to sustain the conviction, the prosecution is

¶74

relying on the evidence of one eye witness i.e PW 14 Abdul

¶75

Rehan and four other circumstances. These circumstances

are :-

i. Motive;

ii. Recovery;

iii. The evidence of PW 19 Mohammed Ansari who is an approver and

¶80

iv. Conduct of the accused persons.

¶81

The prosecution has relied on the evidence of PW 14

¶82

Abdul Rehan who is the son of deceased Abdul Rehman. PW 14 Abdul Rehan has stated that at the time of the incident, he was in the shop with his father. His father closed the shop and as they were going to the road, one auto rickshaw came there. The auto rickshaw had white hood. From the said auto rickshaw, three persons got down. They pressed the mouth of his father and they took his father in the auto

¶83

rickshaw and went away. PW 14 Abdul Rehan went home

¶84

and narrated the incident to his mother. On the next day, the dead body of his father was found. This witness has identified the appellants i.e accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as the

¶85

jfoanz vkacsjdj 7 of 28

¶86

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶87

very same persons who forcibly took away his father. This

¶88

witness has further stated that he has identified these accused persons in the test identification parade. This TIP was held by PW 16 Mr. Bhamre. No doubt, that PW 14 Abdul

¶89

Rehan is stated to be an eye witness to the incident, however, we do not find it safe to rely on his testimony. The reason is that the TIP was held on 15.12.2010 and the FIR in

¶90

the present case was lodged on 24.11.2010 & PW 1 Abdul Hanan who is the elder brother of PW 14 Abdul Rehan has stated that about 13 days after lodging the FIR, the police called him to the Police Station. PW 1 Abdul Hanan has stated that it is true that 13 days after the FIR, when he and his brother Abdul Rehan had gone to the Police Station, all the 5 accused were in the lock up and the police informed

¶91

that those 5 accused were arrested for the murder of his father. In addition, PW 1 Abdul Hanan has stated that it is true that when after the arrest, the police had produced the accused persons in the Court of Magistrate, he and his brother Abdul Rehan had gone to the Court to see them.

¶92

jfoanz vkacsjdj 8 of 28

¶93

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶94

Accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar was arrested on 26.11.2010 and accused Nos. 2 and 3 i.e Sajid Akhtar and Mujamil were arrested on 27.11.2010. Thus, the evidence on record shows

¶95

that PW 14 Abdul Rehan had an opportunity to see the accused prior to the test identification parade. In such case, his testimony relating to identifying the accused persons later in test identification parade is seriously affected.

¶96

Looking to all these facts, we do not find it safe to rely on the testimony of PW 14 Abdul Rehan who according to the prosecution, is an eye witness to the incident.

¶97

The next circumstance against the accused is motive.

¶98

The prosecution is relying on the evidence of PW 1 Abdul Hannan, PW 10 Rizwana, PW 13 Suraiyya and PW 17 Sayyed

¶99

on the aspect of motive. PW 1 Abdul Hannan is the son of deceased Abdul Rehman. He has stated that one maintenance proceeding was going on between Raju i.e accused No. 1 and his wife and Abdul Rehman was trying to settle the said matter. Due to this, the accused persons had

¶100

jfoanz vkacsjdj 9 of 28

¶101

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶102

kidnapped his father and committed his murder. It is pertinent to note that the prosecution has examined PW 10 Rizwana who is the wife of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar @ Raju. PW 10 Rizwana has stated that her marriage with accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar took place on 4.5.2009. After marriage, her husband and his family members started harassing her and demanding that she should bring money from her parents. To fulfill the said demands, they used to drive her out of the house, however, her father used to again drop her in her matrimonial house after convincing the accused. PW 10 Rizwana has stated that on one Friday, her husband beat her and he pushed her down the staircase and told her to bring Rs. 1.5 Lacs otherwise he would kill her by pouring kerosene on her and by setting her on fire. She

¶103

went to her parents' house and informed them about the incident. Her father then informed the incident to Rehman tailor (deceased). Rehman tailor advised her father that there would be danger to the life of his daughter i.e Rizwana in her matrimonial house and therefore, he should not send

¶104

jfoanz vkacsjdj 10 of 28

¶105

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶106

her to that house. Then, Rizwana, her father and Rehman tailor (deceased) went to Women Redressal Center in Malegaon. Thereafter, inquiry in Rizwana's case commenced. Thereafter, Rizwana also filed Maintenance Petition against accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar. Rizwana has stated that her husband was angry with Rehman tailor (deceased) as he was interfering in the matter and he was representing from the side of Rizwana, therefore, her husband committed the murder of Rehman tailor. Thus, the wife of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar has stated the motive for accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar to commit the murder of Abdul Rehman. Learned APP pointed out that Accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar is the brother of accused No. 1. Accused No. 3 Mujamil is the friend of accused No. 1, hence,they would also have animus against Rehman Tailor and thus, motive to commit the offence.

¶107

8. As stated earlier, PW 1 Abdul Hannan and PW 10

¶108

Rizwana have stated about the motive for the accused to

¶109

jfoanz vkacsjdj 11 of 28

¶110

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶111

commit the crime. PW 13 Suraiyya and PW 17 Sayyed have also stated about the aspect of motive. PW 13 Suraiyya is the wife of deceased Abdul Rehman. She has stated that there was a family dispute between accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar and his wife Rizwana and the matter was referred to Panchayat Committee of their community. Her husband (deceased) was attending the said Panchayat on behalf of Rizwana, therefore, accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar was angry with her husband and therefore, he committed murder of her husband.

¶112

PW 17 Mr. Sayyed is the investigating officer. He has

¶113

stated that during investigation, it was revealed that the wife of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar had filed maintenance proceeding in the Court and deceased Rehman tailor was intervening on behalf of the wife of accused No. 1 and therefore, accused No. 1 was angry with Rehman tailor and for that reason, he entered into conspiracy with other

¶114

accused and committed the murder of Rehman tailor.

¶115

jfoanz vkacsjdj 12 of 28

¶116

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶117

Accused No. 2 is the brother of accused No. 1 and accused No. 3 is the friend of accused No. 1. Thus, through the evidence of PW 1 Abdul Hannan, PW 10 Rizwana, PW 13 Suraiyya and PW 17 Mr. Sayyed, the prosecution has

¶118

established the motive for accused to commit the murder of

¶119

Rehman tailor.

¶120

Thereafter, the prosecution has relied on the

¶121

circumstance of recovery of incriminating articles from all the three accused persons. As far as accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar is concerned, PW 6 Haji Mohammed who is the panch witness has stated that on 27.11.2010, police called him to the police station. Accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar was in police custody. In his presence, accused No.1 Shahid Akhtar stated

¶122

that he wanted to handover the clothes which were on his person at the time of the incident. Accused Shahid further informed that he had kept the clothes in his house. PW 6 Haji Mohammed has further stated that thereafter accused

¶123

No. 1 Shahid Akhtar led the police and panchas to his house

¶124

jfoanz vkacsjdj 13 of 28

¶125

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶126

and he took out one shirt and pant. The shirt and pant had blood stains. These clothes came to be seized. These clothes were sent to C.A. The C.A. report Exh. 35 shows that the shirt and the pant which were recovered at the instance of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar were stained with blood of 'B' group. The C.A. report Exh. 37 shows that the blood group of the deceased was "B". PW 6 Haji Mohammed has also stated about recovery of knife at the instance of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar. This knife was also stained with blood of "B" group. Thus, finding of blood of "B" group on the clothes of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar as well as on the knife which was recovered at his instance is a strong incriminating circumstance against him.

¶127

As far as accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar is concerned, panch witness PW 7 Shakeel Ahmed has deposed about recovery of clothes of accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar at the instance of Sajid Akhtar. This witness has not made any reference to the clothes being stained with blood, however,

¶128

jfoanz vkacsjdj 14 of 28

¶129

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶130

this panch witness stated that some mud stains were found

¶131

on the clothes which were recovered at the instance of accused No.2 Sajid. CA report Exh. 36 shows that the mud found on the pant of accused No. 1 Sajid Akhtar tallied with the earth sample which was taken from the place where the

¶132

dead body of Abdul Rehman was found. This shows presence of accused No. 2 at the spot where the dead body

¶133

was found. Thus, this is an incriminating circumstance as far as accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar is concerned.

¶134

According to the prosecution, there is recovery of blood

¶135

stained clothes at the instance of accused No.3 Mujamil, however, the panch witness in respect of said recovery turned hostile, hence, the prosecution is relying on the evidence of PW 17 Police Inspector Mr. Sayyed Shaukat whose evidence shows that blood stained clothes were recovered at the instance of accused No. 3 Mujamil. PW 17 PI Mr. Sayyed has stated that on 29.11.2010 accused No. 3

¶136

Mujamil informed that he had hidden his clothes in his house

¶137

jfoanz vkacsjdj 15 of 28

¶138

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶139

which were on his person at the time of the incident. Accordingly, PW 17 PI Mr. Sayyed prepared memorandum panchanama Exh. 60. Thereafter, accused No. 3 Mujamil led them to his house at Bismilla Baag. He went inside the house and took out one shirt and pant. The said clothes were attached under panchnama Exh. 61. The said clothes are at Articles 10 and 11. These clothes were sent to CA and

¶140

as per CA report Exh. 35, the clothes which were recovered at the instance of accused No.3 Mujamil had blood stains of

¶141

"B" group. As stated earlier, blood group of the deceased is also "B". Thus, this is a highly incriminating circumstance

¶142

which connects accused No. 3 Mujamil to the crime.

¶143

No doubt, the panch witness PW 8 Shafique has turned

¶144

hostile, however, it is settled law that we can rely on the evidence of investigating officer in respect of the recovery. In the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohd.

¶145

Aslam Vs. State of Maharashtra¹ , it was contended that

¶146

as the panch witness has turned hostile, the evidence of

¶147

1 (2001) 9 SCC 362

¶148

jfoanz vkacsjdj 16 of 28

¶149

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶150

investigating officer was unsupported and hence, it cannot be relied upon. The Supreme Court observed that, "We cannot agree with the said contention. If panch witness turned hostile, which happens very often in criminal cases, the evidence of the person who effected the recovery would not stand vitiated. Nor do we agree with the contention that his testimony is unsupported or uncorroborated. The very

¶151

fact that PW-34 produced in the court lethal weapons recovered is a very formidable circumstance to support his evidence." Thus, it was held in the case of Mohd. Aslam (supra) that the evidence of the Police Officer effecting recovery would not stand vitiated by reason of the panch witness turning hostile.

¶152

14. In the case of Modan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan² ,

¶153

the Supreme Court observed that if the evidence of the investigating officer who recovered the material objects is convincing, the evidence as to recovery need not be rejected

¶154

on the ground that seizure witnesses do not support the

¶155

2 AIR 1978 SC 1511

¶156

jfoanz vkacsjdj 17 of 28

¶157

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶158

prosecution version. In the present case, we find that the evidence of PW 17 PI Mr. Sayyed is cogent and convincing, hence, we have no hesitation in relying on the same.

¶159

15. PW 19 Mohammed Arif has stated that on 24.11.2010

¶160

at about 7.30 p.m., he halted his auto rickshaw at Macchi Bazaar Rickshaw stop and was waiting for passengers. At

¶161

that time, two unknown persons (accused Nos. 1 and 3) came there and told him that they wanted to go to Ayesha Nagar. Thereafter, those persons sat in the auto rickshaw. After some time, one other person (accused no. 2) sat in the auto rickshaw. This witness asked accused No.2 Sajid Akhtar

¶162

why he sat in the auto rickshaw, whereupon he stated that his brother had called him there by making phone call and his brother directed him to sit in the auto rickshaw. Accused No. 1 also told PW 19 Mohammed Arif that accused No. 2 is

¶163

his brother. This witness has further stated that at about 20

¶164

feet distance behind his auto rickshaw and near factory,

¶165

there was one tailoring shop. The tailor came out of the

¶166

jfoanz vkacsjdj 18 of 28

¶167

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶168

shop. The tailor started walking towards the auto rickshaw.

¶169

At that time, accused Nos. 1 and 3 came behind the said

¶170

tailor. Accused No. 1 was having a long knife and accused No. 3 was having a smaller knife in their hands. Accused No. 1 touched his knife to the front neck of the tailor and accused No. 3 touched his knife to the waist of tailor and they brought the tailor towards the auto rickshaw. Thereupon, this witness started running from that place. Accused No. 2 who was sitting in the auto rickshaw rushed towards this witness and caught hold of his shirt collar from backside and asked him not to run away. Accused No. 2 further told this witness that they would not kill that person but they would just explain some things to him. Thereafter, PW 19 Mohammed Arif sat on the driver seat of the rickshaw.

¶171

At that time, accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar was sitting near him. Accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar and accused No. 3 Mujamil were sitting on the back seat touching the knife on the person of the tailor. When the rickshaw came near Pharmacy College which is on the road called 60 feet road,

¶172

jfoanz vkacsjdj 19 of 28

¶173

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶174

the accused persons told him to stop the rickshaw. At that time, accused No. 2 Sajid Akhtar threw the tailor outside the

¶175

rickshaw. Accused No. 1 gave kick blow on the back of the tailor. Accused No. 3 stabbed the knife in the stomach near left waist of the tailor. The accused persons then told him that they have to leave the place early. They asked him to take the rickshaw to Bajrangwadi. Accordingly, he dropped

¶176

them there.

¶177

Learned counsel for the appellants, on the aspect of last seen of the accused by PW 14 Abdul Rehan, pointed out that there is discrepancy between the evidence of PW 14 Abdul Rehan who is the son of the deceased and PW 13 Suraiyya who is the wife of the deceased. However, as stated earlier, we are not relying on the evidence of PW 14 Abdul Rehan, hence, we do not find it necessary to deal with this discrepancy.

¶178

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶179

20 of 28

¶180

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶181

Thereafter, it was submitted that PW 14 Abdul Rehan

¶182

has stated that it was dark at the time of the incident, hence, it was not possible for PW 14 to observe the accused persons

¶183

so as to correctly identify them later on. As far as this submission is concerned, as stated earlier, we are not relying on the evidence of PW 14 Abdul Rehan, hence, again we do not find it necessary to deal with this submission. However,

¶184

it is to be noted that the incident occurred in the city of Malegaon and it has occurred near a pharmacy college on 60 feet road which is a main road, hence, it cannot be completely dark as there is bound to be some light from the street lamps and other kinds of source of light.

¶185

Thereafter, it was submitted that PW 19 Mohammed

¶186

Arif has stated that the accused left the dead body near Pharmacy College, however, the dead body was found near Millat Nagar Madarsa. In this connection, we would like to refer to Exh. 43 which is spot panchnama where the dead

¶187

body was found. The spot panchnama shows that the dead

¶188

jfoanz vkacsjdj 21 of 28

¶189

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶190

body was found on 60 feet road. The evidence of PW 18

¶191

Vijay Mistari shows that the place of the incident was behind Millat Nagar Madarsa. The spot panchnama shows that Millat Nagar Madarsa was on 60 feet road. The evidence of PW 19 Mohammed Arif also shows that Pharmacy College is on 60 feet road. So, it appears that there is no discrepancy as some of the witnesses have referred to the spot as near

¶192

Pharmacy College while some have referred to the spot as near Millat Nagar Madarsa. The spot is one and the same. Thus, we find no merit in this submission that there is discrepancy in the place where the dead body was found, hence, the entire prosecution case is false.

¶193

As far as the evidence of PW 19 Mohammed Arif is

¶194

concerned, some omissions and contradictions were brought to our notice by Advocate Mrs. Ansari, the learned counsel for accused No. 2. The omission was in relation to PW 19 Mohammed Arif telling the accused persons that they were

¶195

not doing a good thing, however, we are of the opinion that

¶196

jfoanz vkacsjdj 22 of 28

¶197

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶198

this omission is not material in nature, hence, we need not

¶199

give any importance to the same.

¶200

Thereafter, contradiction was pointed out about which

¶201

accused person threw Rehman tailor outside the auto rickshaw. This contradiction also in our opinion is not an important one, hence, we are not inclined to give any importance to the same.

¶202

Thereafter, it was submitted on behalf of the appellants that the evidence of PW 19 Mohammed Arif shows that after

¶203

the incident, accused persons asked him to stop near one hotel. The hotel did not have any name. At that time, from the lane, one man having long beard came there and he stopped near the rickshaw. At that time, accused Nos. 1 and 2 got down from the rickshaw and they handed over two knives i.e one long knife and one short knife, one acid bottle and four wooden dandas to that person and that person went

¶204

away. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the

¶205

jfoanz vkacsjdj 23 of 28

¶206

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶207

appellants that from where the accused persons produced

¶208

the acid bottles and four wooden dandas is not known because none of the witnesses have made any reference to the four wooden dandas during the incident. It was submitted that this case is totally false which can be seen from the fact that there is no reference by any of the witnesses to any wooden dandas whereas after the incident

¶209

occurred, PW 19 Mohammed Arif has stated that four wooden dandas were handed over by the accused to one man having long beard. As far as this aspect is concerned, the wooden dandas are very short wooden sticks, hence, it is possible that wooden dandas were tucked at the waists of the accused persons and after the incident, the accused persons might have handed over these wooden dandas to the man having long beard.

¶210

As far as the evidence of approver is concerned, we

¶211

find that his evidence is corroborated by many circumstances. According to the approver, the accused

¶212

jfoanz vkacsjdj 24 of 28

¶213

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶214

persons had participated in the incident. This is corroborated by the fact that the clothes of accused No. 1 Shahid Akhtar and accused No. 3 Mujamil were stained with blood of "B" group which is the blood group of the deceased. The evidence of approver is further corroborated by the fact that the mud found on the clothes of accused No. 2 tallied with the specimen of earth taken from the place where the dead body was found. The evidence of the approver is further corroborated by the fact that the knife recovered at the instance of accused No. 1 was stained with blood of "B" group. The approver has stated that the accused persons threw the dead body near Pharmacy College which is on 60 feet road. The evidence on record including spot panchnama and the evidence of other witnesses shows that the dead

¶215

body was found on 60 feet road. In addition, the evidence of the approver is further corroborated by the medical evidence. PW 15 Dr. Sarika Devare conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Abdul Rehman. She has found an injury on the abdomen due to which the intestine

¶216

jfoanz vkacsjdj 25 of 28

¶217

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶218

had come outside the abdominal cavity. It is pertinent to

¶219

note that the approver has stated that accused No. 3 had assaulted Abdul Rehman in the stomach with a knife. In addition to this injury, some other minor injuries were found on the dead body. These injuries could have been caused on account of deceased falling down after he was assaulted. PW 15 Dr. Sarika Devare further stated that the stab wound

¶220

in the abdomen is possible by the knife and the probable cause of death was stab injury in the abdomen due to which intestine had come out. Thus, on going through the evidence on record, we find that there is sufficient corroboration to the evidence of the approver, hence, we have no hesitation in relying on his testimony.

¶221

The evidence on record clearly shows that the accused persons have committed the offence punishable under Sections 364 and 302 r/w 34 of IPC. In addition, the accused persons have been convicted under Section 120-B of IPC. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there

¶222

jfoanz vkacsjdj 26 of 28

¶223

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶224

is no evidence at all on record to show that the accused

¶225

persons had entered into any conspiracy to commit the murder of Abdul Rehman. Direct evidence on criminal conspiracy is very difficult to gather. Conspiracy is to be inferred from the attaining circumstances in the given case. In the present case, it is seen that all the accused persons had gathered together. They all took Abdul Rehman with

¶226

them in an auto rickshaw. Accused No. 2 threw Abdul Rehman outside the rickshaw. Thereafter, accused No. 1 gave a kick on the back of Abdul Rehman and accused No. 3 then took out a knife and stabbed Abdul Rehman in his stomach. Then, accused No. 3 told to drive the rickshaw away from the place otherwise somebody will come to that place. Looking to all these facts, it can be safely inferred

¶227

that a criminal conspiracy took place between the accused persons and pursuant to the said conspiracy, they kidnapped and murdered Abdul Rehman.

¶228

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶229

27 of 28

¶230

10. cri apeals 726-14 161-14 & 421-14.doc

¶231