RAMES R LALWANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these criminal applications are filed for discharge from Sessions Case No. 858 of 1993 challenging the orders dated 6th April, 1999 and 31st August, 1999 passed by the two learned Additional Sessions Judges, Greater Bombay rejecting the respective applications of the applicants made for discharge. The applicants in the above two applications are two of the three accused against whom offence under sections 302 and 201 read with section 34 of I. P. C. were registered by Vile Parle Police Station under C. R. No. 163 of 1993 in respect of the death of one Manohar Singh under suspicious circumstances. Since both the applications arise in respect of common crime registered against both the applicants, these two petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE brief facts, involving the applicants-accused in the aforesaid offences, are as follows : deceased Manohar Singh was working as Supervisor in Italino Yard Marble Shop which was run at Vile-Parle (East), Mumbai by a partnership firm of which Ramesh @ Romi Ratan Lalwani, the applicant in Criminal Application No. 1405 of 1999, was the partner, Dhruv Kumar Jha, the applicant in Criminal Application No. 2886 of 1999, was working as watchman in the said shop. The police received information on 2-4-1993 about one dead body lying in a Nala in front of the above Italino Yard Marble Shop. The police went to the Nala and took out the dead body from the said Nala and registered offence under C. R. No. 163 of 1993 on 2-4-1993 initially against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police recorded statements of some witnesses and arrested three accused persons on 8-4-1993 i. e. the above two applicants and one more accused by name Nandlal who is shown to be the friend of the applicant-Lalwani. The dead body was identified to be that of Manohar Singh who was working as supervisor in the shop of applicant-Lalwani. The body was send for post mortem and the report of the post mortem shows that the deceased died of asphyxia due to strangulation. After investigation the chargesheet was filed on 24-6-94 in which the applicant Jha who was a watchman in the above shop is shown as accused No. 1 and applicant Lalwani is shown as accused No. 2 and accused Nandlal is shown as accused No. 3.

(3.) BOTH the applicants made applications for discharge before the Sessions Court on the ground that the evidence on record is not sufficient to Prosecute the applicants. Applicant-Lalwani filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 167 of 1999 in the Sessions Court for discharge before the charge was framed which was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, on 6th April, 1999. Applicant-Jha filed separate application for discharge on 20th August, 1999 which came to be rejected by order of another Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay on 31st August, 1999. Against the said orders, both the applications preferred the above applications in this Court for quashing the orders rejecting their applications for discharge and prayed for their discharge from the aforesaid Sessions Case. The Counsel for the parties are heard at length.