STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. AJAY DAYARAM GOPNARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Criminal Reference Registration No.1/2013 for confirmation of death sentence against accused no.1Ajay Dayaram Gopnarayan.

(2.) Both the accused persons Ajay Dayaram Gopnarayan and Nitin Nandkishor Gudadhe have also preferred Criminal Appeal No.225/2013 praying for acquittal against judgment of conviction for offences punishable under section 302 and 392 of I.P.C. and accused no.1Ajay is sentenced to death while accused no.2Nitin Gudadhe is sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(3.) The prosecution case is that the deceased Vijayatai Vitthalrao Pund aged about 75 years, who was mother of PW1 Sunil Vitthalrao Pund, a practicing lawyer by profession at Amravati was residing in Venus Park area of Kanta Nagar, Amravati. The house was constructed by PW1Sunil about 67 years before the date of incident by engaging a building contractor PW2Dilip Lade and during the construction activity, accused no.1 Ajay and accused no.2 Nitin in turn were engaged by Dilip as Labourers. After construction of the house, accused no.1Ajay on his request to PW1Sunil, started residing in one room at one end of his house and was also doing the work of cleaning the courtyard, gardening work in the house, so also the sundry works like payments of electricity bills etc. He resided for about 11/4 month. During the said period accused no.1Ajay also used to earn by driving auto rickshaw and used to park his auto rickshaw in front of the house of PW1Sunil. But then, he stayed only for 11/4 month, 10 months prior to the date of incident and left the house. At the relevant time, PW1Sunil's wife and son were residing at Nagpur. On the date of incident namely on 17.07.2008, PW1Sunil came from the Court at about 2.30 p.m., took lunch and left for his village Porgavan, Tq. Morshi, Dist. Amravati with his driver in the car. Deceased Vijayatai was alone at home. PW1Sunil locked the main gate of the compound though small gate beside it was open. PW3Sunita went to the house of Vijayatai at about 3.30 p.m. as instructed by the neighbour Smt. Chaudhari and rung the door bell and gave calls to Vijayatai but she did not receive any response and at that time she saw one Luna parked in front of the house and a pair of footwear in front of the main door of the house. She then went back. At about 6.00 pm she met Tulsabai and told her about 'no response' and, therefore, both of them went and knocked the door and rung the bell but there was no response from inside. Tulsabai, therefore, went to rear side of the house to find that the backside door was open. She went inside from that door to see Vijayatai lying in a pool of blood and as such opened the door of the hall and started shouting and crying in frightened condition. Both of them informed the neighbourers, Shri Nagalkar and Shri Adhao and informed them about it. At about 6.55 p.m. PW1Sunil came back from village Porgavhan to see that the crowd had gathered in front of his house. He went inside the house to find his mother lying in pool of blood with several injuries on neck, throat and head. He saw handle of the cupboard of his wife was bent though the cupboard was closed. He then lodged the report at Police Station Gadge Nagar. Dog squad was called, finger print expert was also called with photographer who took photographs. Inquest Panchanama and spot panchanama was conducted. The dead body was, thereafter, sent for post mortem. Investigation started and finally both the accused were traced and arrested and the evidence was collected. The chargesheet was filed in the Court. The trial was held. As many as 19 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The defence was of total denial. The trial court heard the parties, framed points for determination and recorded his findings holding that though there was no eye witness to the incident, the chain of circumstances was complete and as a result, recorded the judgment of conviction of both the accused persons. The trial Court found accused no.1Ajay to be the person of unscrupulous character, who according to the trial court, took the advantage of the trust of the lady in him who for his intention to commit theft and robbery, committed brutal murder of the deceased Vijayatai. The trial Court, therefore, held him to be the person deserving death sentence and accused no.2Nitin deserving life sentence. Hence this reference and appeal.