LAXMAN ALIAS LAXMAYYA GANGARAM ZINNA C/O ZINNA NARSAIAH SATHEARAM MONDAL MASALPUR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Appeal, the Appellant Accused has taken an exception to the Judgment and order dated 24 th February, 1992, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai by which he has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that the complainant Dilip Ramdhar Yadav (P.W.No.3) and his father were employed by M/s. Royal Security to guard a hill property known as Talzan Hill in the creek of Charkop village at Mumbai. The said Talzan Hill is an island in Charkop creek and it is un inhabited and it is full of trees and bushes. It is alleged that during high tides, it is not possible to walk up to the said hill but only when the high tide is over, it is possible to walk to the hill.

(3.) In the morning at about 11.00 a.m. on 31 st March, 1989, the complainant made a round of the hill and came back at 1.00 p.m. At that time, nothing unusual was noticed by him. On 3 rd April, 1989 at about 10.00 a.m, the complainant was sitting under a tree on the shore of the creek. At about 11.00 a.m., he noticed that some women were moving on the Northen side of the hill. He suspected that they would cut the trees. Therefore, he crossed the creek, went to the hill and was successful in driving the women out. After some time, when he came to the foot of the hill and started crossing muddy area, he noticed that a person was lying there. Initially he thought that someone had consumed liquor and was sleeping there under the influence of liquor. But, after he went near the person he found that the person was dead. His age was 30 to 35 years and his height was 5.5 inches. The complainant found that his tongue had come out of the mouth. The shirt on the person of the deceased was soaked in blood. There was a cut in his stomach and intestine had come out. The complainant found that the body was decomposed. After seeing the body, he got frightened and he contacted Ramesh Pradhumana Pandey, his security supervisor. The said Ramesh Pandey is P.W. No.9. On the advice of Ramesh Pandey, the complainant proceeded to Kandivali Police Station and lodged the report on the basis of which the FIR was registered. P.S.I. Aba Nanasaheb Jadhav (P.W.No.14) visited the spot and recorded the inquest panchanama. The dead body was found to be of one Bhumayya, son of the Appellant. The dead body was sent for post mortem. On 13 th April, 1989, PSI Jadhav arrested the Appellant and seized the blood stained Dhoti recovered at the instance of the Appellant. The seized muddemal property was sent for the Chemical Analysis. The charge sheet was filed for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Accordingly, the charge for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was framed. Plea of the Appellant was recorded and he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution has examined 16 witnesses. After the prosecution evidence was closed, statement of the Appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. In the said statement, the Appellant purportedly confessed of having committed the offence. From the cross examination of the prosecution witness made by the advocate for the Appellant, it appears that the defence of the Appellant was of complete denial. The trial Court held that, chain of circumstances namely (a) last seen together, (b) finding of blood stains of blood group of the deceased on the dhoti of the Appellant recovered at the instance of the Appellant and (c) after the incident, the Appellant left for native place, have been established. The Trial Court also relied upon the incriminatory statement of the Appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Code") and held the Appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.