PANDIAN KANAPPAN NADAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE much-maligned Bombay Police Force deserves a compliment and a pat on the back for some excellent detection and investigation in this very unfortunate case wherein an elderly gentleman was fatally stabbed for some small economic gain. Along with the Investigating Officers, the Police dog "julie" who provided the crucial links with the murder weapons and the blood-stained chappals also deserves an appreciative and affectionate pat on the head. Dog-tracking evidence, which has been much in use with the Investigative Agencies in recent times, particularly in cases relating to explosives and drugs, was hitherto regarded in many quarters as being evidence of a rather weak or unreliable class. The Courts need to take cognizance of the fact that there exists a very elaborate procedure for the selection of dogs that form part of the dog squad maintained by the Investigative Agencies in so far as not only does the Department select that breed of dogs which has been prooven to be outstanding where its skills in this field are concerned, but that the puppies are carefully selected also on the basis of their pedigree. These animals are thereafter put through very rigorous training programmes lasting over a year at the hands of persons who can be regarded as experts in the field. Therefore, the special skills are not only sharpened but oriented to an extent whereby they acquire a very high level of professionality and it is thereafter that the dogs are used for actual detection. In this background where a dog is successful in pointing out the criminal, the evidence is of an extremely high calibre and a Court would place heavy reliance on it. This Court had occasion to consider the value of dog-tracking evidence in Criminal Appeal No. 510 of 1985 decided on 7-10-1992 by one of us (Saldanha, J.) reported in 1993 (3) Bom. C. R. 309. wherein the Court had occasion to consider the evolution of the concept of dog-tracking evidence over the years and to hold that, undoubtedly, this evidence must pass the test of scrutiny and reliability as in the case of any other evidence, but once it does so, that it is material evidence of the highest order.

(2.) TWO issues of considerable importance have been canvassed with a degree of vehemence by the contesting parties to this Criminal Appeal. The first of them concerns the question as to whether in a case of multiple dying declarations some oral and one written coupled with communication through gestures, the prosecution would be justified in asking for a conviction on the strength of such material. The second issue which is of equal importance concerns the interesting aspect as to whether Dog-tracking evidence can provide conclusive proof in relation to identification of a culprit. It is necessary however to first set out briefly the facts relating to these appeals.

(3.) THE deceased in this case, a retired gentleman by the name of Mukund Bedekar aged-62 years was at the relevant time residing in a flat on the first floor of Rukmini Nivas at Hindu Colony, Dadar. On 20-10-1987 his neighbour Waman Chintman Joglekar was resting in the afternoon after lunch and he heard a thud from the adjoining flat occupied by Bedekar which is separated only by a partition wall. Shortly, thereafter his door bell started ringing continuously and on opening the door Joglekar who himself is a retired Major from the Army was taken aback to see his neighbour Bedekar standing there in his Vest and underwear virtually soaked with blood having sustained an injury on the abdomen with his intestine protruding from it. Bedekar spoke a few words to Joglekar and exclaimed to him "see Dada how seriously I have been attacked" and expressed to him that he had been stabbed with a Sura. Joglekar and his wife immediately got hold of a table cloth with which they covered the injured Bedekar; they took him to his room and laid him down on the floor and tried to give some assistance to him. Bedekar asked for some water and he thereafter expressed the desire to go to the toilet whereupon Joglekar assisted him by providing him with an enamel pot in view of his condition.