Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), judgment per SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. with SANDESH D. PATIL, J., dated 18th February, 2026 — Criminal Appeal Nos. 855 of 2024 (Rahul Yadav @ Kaindi Ramsahay Yadav, original Accused No.3), 206 of 2025 (AshishKumar Nishad @ Lalla, original Accused No.2) and 687 of 2025 (Shivam Vedprakash Tiwari, original Accused No.1), decided by common judgment against the convictions passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.151 of 2018: Section 302 r/w Section 34 IPC (life imprisonment + fine Rs.10,000/- each), Section 307 r/w Section 34 IPC (RI 5 years + fine Rs.10,000/- each), Section 201 r/w Section 34 IPC (SI 3 years + fine Rs.2,000/- each), sentences concurrent; acquittal under Section 324 r/w Section 34 IPC; set off under Section 428 CrPC. Incident of 06/11/2017 near the juice centre by Dnyanoday School, Thane: deceased Tarsim Singh Sahota alias Bobby fatally stabbed; PW-1 Ajay Singh, the injured first informant (F.I.R. C.R. No.I-317 of 2017, Vartak Nagar Police Station, 10:50 p.m.), and PW-2 Mahesh Soni were the reliable eye-witnesses; the quarrel originated in derogatory comments made by Accused No.1 about PW-8. HELD: (i) messages between the deceased and PW-8 (Article-1) showed the deceased, though angry and the first caller, never intended murder but only a fight — thereafter Accused No.1 took matters into his hands and arrived with friends; (ii) three knives were involved and the deceased's four grave vital-part injuries plus defence injuries on the arms were inconsistent with the deceased-as-aggressor theory; (iii) the CCTV footage was unclear and had not been relied upon even by the trial Judge, the detailed ocular evidence of injured PW-1 and PW-2 taking precedence and corroborated by the postmortem (PW-9) and treating-doctor (PW-12) evidence; (iv) hostile witnesses PW-3 and PW-4 were unreliable and their evidence unhelpful to either side; (v) recovery of two knives from a tree trunk at Accused No.1's instance satisfied Section 27 of the Evidence Act (authorship of concealment/exclusive knowledge), one knife bearing 'AB Group' blood matching the deceased; (vi) blood on the accused's clothing was disregarded as implausible (same clothes for ~11 days); (vii) the accused's arrest-panchanama injuries were absolutely minor and Medical Officers recorded no external injuries at blood sampling, so non-explanation was immaterial — Kumar v. State Represented by Inspector of Police (2018) 7 SCC 536 distinguished as resting on materially different facts; (viii) no grave and sudden provocation; the vital-part injuries and PW-1's abdominal stab wound were intentional, not scuffle injuries; (ix) all three accused, including Accused No.3 who pulled PW-1 away, acted in pursuance of common intention. RESULT: Appeals dismissed; Accused No.2 (on bail) ordered to surrender forthwith and bail bond cancelled; connected Interim Application Nos. 3069 of 2025, 4799 of 2025 and Interim Application (ST) Nos. 24674 of 2025, 23709 of 2025 (filed by Gurpreet Kaur Sahota, sister of the deceased) disposed of.
