VINAYAK ANURLEKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant, who stands convicted by the District and Sessions Judge, South Goa, Margao, for an offence punishable under Section302 of the Indian Penal Code, by Judgment, dated13th February, 2002, and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life, has filed this appeal challenging the aforesaid conviction and sentence. Since this appeal was presented by the appellant through jail, we had appointed Mr. D'souza, as the counsel for the appellant. During the hearing of the appeal, we had requested Mr. Lotlikar, Senior Advocate, to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae. At the outset we record our appreciation for the efforts taken by Mr. Lotlikar, senior counsel, and the assistance rendered to us to effectually decide this appeal.

(2.) THE facts as are necessary, in brief, for the decision of the appeal, are set out hereunder : P.W.21 P. S. I. Manjunath Dessai, was attached to the Sanguem Police Station as an Officer-in-Charge. On 7th October, 1999, at about8. 15 a. m. , he recorded the complaint of P. W.1 Rajendra Naik, brother-in-law of the appellant/accused. THE complainant suspected the appellant/accused of having committed the murder of his father, Uttam. THE said complaint is at Exhibit 7. On the basis of the complaint at Exhibit 7, P.W.21 P. S. I. Dessai registered an offence under Section302 of the Indian Penal Code. After registration of the offence, P.W.21 P. S. I. Dessai proceeded to the scene of offence and drew the scene of offence panchanama, at Exhibit 11, in the present of P.W.3 Shaikh Nizamuddin. He also drew the sketch of the scene of offence, which is at Exhibit 12. From the scene of offence, P.W.21 attached a wooden stand (Addoli) without the blade. He also drew the sample of the blood mixed with earth and collected sample of plain earth. A plastic tube containing lime and a plastic bag having blood stains were also attached. THE wooden stand (Addoli) is M. O. 1, the plastic tube of lime is M. O. 5 and the plastic bag is M. O. 6. THE Inquest Panchanama is at Exhibit 13, which was conducted in the presence of P.W.3 Shaikh.

(3.) THE Appellant was arrested on7th October, 1999. On the next day, that is, 8th October, 1999, P.W.21 P. S. I. Dessai interrogated the appellant/accused at6. 30 a. m. , and he is alleged to have made a disclosure statement to point out the place where the weapon of assault was hidden and also to point out the place where his clothes as well as the missing piece of the ear of the deceased were kept. THE memorandum of disclosure is at Exhibit 30. According to P.W.21 P. S. I. Dessai, he secured the presence of the panchas and the recovery was effected under Section27 of the Evidence Act. P.W.9 Srinivas Kossambe is the panch witness. A cricket bat (M. O. 10) was recovered at the instance of the appellant from his room. THE clothes of the appellant (M. Os. 11 and 12), namely, shirt and short pant, were recovered from below the cot of the appellant on being pointed out by the appellant. THE appellant pointed out the missing piece of ear from the washing place in the kitchen. THE clothes of the deceased were attached by panchanama at Exhibit 24 in the presence of P.W.6 Ulhas Naik. THE clothes of the deceased are Dhoti (M. O. 9) and sweater (M. O. 8 ). THE muddemal articles were sent to the Chemical Analyser and the report is on record. P. W.16 Dr. Vinod Naik had examined the accused and the certificate of examination is at Exhibit 45. THEre were no visible injuries on the person of the accused. THE appellant/accused was also examined by P. W.17 Dr. (Mrs.) Ujwala Prabhudessai, a Dentist. the certificate is at Exhibit 48. According to P. W.17 Dr. (Mrs.) Prabhudessai, the appellant/accused was using tobacco mixed with lime. P. W.13 Tito D'cunha, a Surveyor in the Irrigation Department, on request by the police at Exhibit 39, had drawn the sketch of the scene of offence at Exhibit 4. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet against the appellant/accused came to be filed.