TUKARAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Father of deceased has preferred instant appeal, getting dissatisfied by the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 4/10/2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Parbhani in Session Case No. 8 of 2017. Similarly, even State is taking exception to the same judgment and is hereby seeking leave to file appeal. We have heard it at the stage of admission.

(2.) Crime was registered bearing no. 210 of 2016 by police official contending that, when he and his colleague had been to investigate crime no. 209 of 2016, at that time around 1.30 p.m. one Pandurang Babarao Kale, an electrician, met them and informed about a motorcycle bearing registration no. MH - 26 - AW - 3605 lying near the field of one Bhimrao Kale and there was blood near the motorcycle. On receipt of such information, he and his colleague both rushed to the said spot. There they saw dead body of a person between age group of 20 to 25 years lying there. Inquiry was undertaken and it revealed from the vehicle particulars, that the dead body was of Gopinath Tukaram Sable, resident of Nijampurwadi, Taluka Ardhapur, District Nanded. There were several injuries on the person of deceased and therefore, on behalf of State, this police official registered crime bearing no. 210 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant, who is father of deceased, would point out that prosecution had successfully shown that death of Gopinath, son of the appellant, was homicidal. Even learned Sessions Judge has answered this point in affirmative. It is further submitted that investigation revealed that present respondent was in the company of deceased. That, there are CCTV footages which were gathered by investigating machinery which clearly reveal present respondent to be with deceased. It is further pointed out that, that apart, even investigating machinery had collected and gathered hair of respondent from the very hands of deceased. On DNA analysis of the said hair, the same were proved to be hair of respondent. Therefore, there was overwhelming and clinching evidence of involvement of respondent.