GAUTAM MAROTI UMALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed under Section 379 Cripc read with Section 2 of the Supreme court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The sole appellant was tried for offences punishable under S. 302, 394 and 404 Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted him holding that the circumstantial evidence is not conclusive. The State preferred an appeal and the High court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the appellant under Section 302 indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. He is further convicted under Section 394 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000. 00, in default, to undergo further imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The prosecution case is as follows: The appellant is the resident of village Andura in Balapur Tehsil. The deceased, in this case, an old lady, by name Panchafula, her husband Namdeo and son Punjab are also the residents of the same village. The accused was the watchman guarding the lands of vast area belonging to the villagers. On 26/11/1984 in the morning at 10. 00 a. m. , it is alleged that the deceased went to her land for collecting the cotton. At that time, she was wearing four pairs of earrings and silver armlets on her person. At about 10. 00 a. m. her son who returned to his house was asked by the accused as to who was working in the land. He told the accused that his mother alone was working in the land. It is alleged, that thereafter the accused went towards the land. Later on her dead body was found lying near the jawar crop under a tree by her son Public Witness 1. A report was given and the investigation commenced and an inquest was held and the dead body was sent for post-mortem. The medicalofficer who conducted the post-mortem opined that the death was due to strangulation. The accused was arrested on 28/11/1984 and it is alleged that at his instance the silver kadas and two pairs of earrings were recovered. On the basis of the evidence so collected, a charge-sheet was laid.

(3.) The prosecution examined seven witnesses. The accused pleaded not guilty. The circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, as set out in paragraph 3 by the High court are as follows: