MOHAN SHRAWAN BHOIR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 13th January, 2000 passed by Additional Sessions judge, Kalyan in Sessions Case No. 68 of 1998 wherein he was convicted for commission of offences punishable under sections 365, 302 and 201 of the indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment on count of murder and for R. I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer S. I. for one month on count of section 365 of I. P. C. and to suffer R. I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer S. I. for one month on count of section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present case, in brief, are thus -

(3.) ONE Mewalal Kanojiya, who was residing at Shastri Nagar, Dombivli, tal. Kalyan and was maintaining himself by running a laundry in the name and style as "sun Shine Laundry". The premises in which the laundry was operated was owned by one Ramesh Bhoir. Mewalal had a son Jaikiran. The accused was also residing in the same vicinity. It is alleged that the accused was married person, but was seducing and inducing a daughter of one Devre. Mewalal noticed the said fact and hence informed about it to Devre and also asked him to take care of his daughter. On that count, on one night, the accused rushed into the house of Devre and on refusal of Devre to permit the accused to have a dialogue with his daughter, the accused assaulted Devre with fist blows. Devre reported the matter to the police and accordingly the accused was called to the Police Station. Thereafter some days prior to the incident, Jaikiran the son of Mewalal was sitting in the laundry and at that relevant time there was a quarrel between accused and a stranger and in the said quarrel the glass of a show-case belonging to Mewalal was broken into pieces and the matter was reported to police by Jaikiran. Thus on account of the said two reason the accused had grudged in his mind against Mewalal and on many occasions, he had given threat to Mewalal as well as his son that he would kill them or he shall make them to leave the said area. On account of the accused, Mewalal had asked his son to shift from the said area and Jaikiran had started residing at Mulund and was frequently visiting to see his father. It is the prosecution case that a friend of Jaikiran informed him on 23-7-1997 that the laundry was closed and his father was not present at Dombivli and he also learnt that the laundry was closed and has not opened for two days. When Jaikiran came and inquired about his father with neighbours, relations and then submitted a missing report to the police. Jaikiran continued enquiries though his relations and that his father had not even gone to his native in Uttar Pradesh and he also came to know that there was a quarrel between Mewalal and accused and hence Jaikiran suspected the accused and as such on 31-7-1997 he lodged F. I. R. with police suspecting abduction of his father by the accused. Accused came to be arrested on that day. On 1-8-1997 the accused made a voluntary disclosure and disclosed to the police the place where he had concealed the dead body of Mewalal and in pursuance of that statement produced the dead body of deceased Mewalal by leading witnesses and police to a septic tank of lavatory situated near his house. It is alleged that at the relevant time even the son of Mewalal was present and after cleaning it, Jaikiran had identified the dead body of his father. He also identified the clothes present on the person of the dead body. On that very day, the accused voluntarily disclosed the place where he had concealed and threw the rope by which he strangulated the deceased before throwing the body of the deceased in the septic tank as well as one key with ring and pair of chappal and in pursuance of that statement, once again accused led the police and panchas to the said septic tank and after sucking filth from the tank, the said articles were recovered and were seized by the police. Statements of witnesses were recorded. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Panchanama of scene of incident was made and on completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was sent to the Court of law. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions.