ASHISH DILIP GORE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the original accused who was convicted by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, for the offence punishable under Section 302 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life imprisonment for three years alongwith payment of fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default, to suffer further R. I. for three months, respectively, for the aforesaid offences. The appellant is challenging the said Judgment and Order passed by the sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 405/99 dated 31st october, 2002.

(2.) Brief facts are as under :-Deceased Vatsala Paraswar used to reside in her house at Bhaskar Colony, Naupada, Thane. She used to stay in the house alone and was of 75 years of age. Her neighbour was one Amol Dabholkar. Appellant-Ashish Gore knew the deceased very well and occasionally stayed with her to give her company and to assist her in her daily chores. The incident in question took place at night between 29. 3. 99 and 30. 3. 99. On 29. 3. 99, the deceased informed her neighbour that she was going to attend the kirtan at Hanuman Mandir at about 9. 30 p. m. and would be returning late and therefore, she informed him that he should not wait for her. According to the prosecution, at about 12. 00 midnight, Amol Dabholkar heard some noise. He inquired as to who was there and according to him, the accused said that he was there. The prosecution case is that the Amol Dabholkar recognised voice of the accused and did not make any further inquiry. On the next day on 30. 3. 99 at about 6. 30 a. m. , the milk vendor knocked the door of the complainant-Amol Dabholkar and told him that his neighbour was not responding to the call given by him. He, therefore, went to the house of the deceased and put on the lights. He noticed that the deceased was lying on a cot and she was covered upto the neck by a bedsheet and found that blood was cozing from her nose. He, accordingly, contacted his other neighbour Sadavarte and called the relative of the deceased Vatsala Paraswar. Accordingly, Gundale, nephew of the deceased came there. The Doctor was called and the Doctor examined Vatsala paraswar and pronounced that she had died about 7-8 hours earlier. The complainant noticed that the ornaments on the person and from the house of the deceased were missing. Accordingly, Gundale informed the police and they started the investigation. The f. I. R. was recorded. The statement of Amol Dabholkar was registered as F. I. R. The accused was arrested on 31. 3. 99. The dead body was sent for post mortem. The clothes of the accused were also attached. Spot panchanama was prepared. Finger print experts were called and they found some finger prints on the steel container. During the interrogation, the accused confessed and volunteered to produce the ornaments which were stolen by him and were given by him to his friend rodrix and one gold chain was given to a jeweller. Rodrix produced the gold ornaments and the person to whom the gold chain was given viz. one Hasmukh Jain produced the gold chain which was pledged by the accused with him. The chargesheet was thereafter framed in the case and the Sessions Court framed the charge under sections 302 and 392 of the IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty to the said charge.

(3.) Learned APP on behalf of the State, Smt. Bhosale submitted that the cause of death of Vatsala was homicidal and though there are no external marks on the neck by strangulation, the post mortem notes indicated that trachea was found to be compressed on its internal examination. She further submitted that the accused used to stay with the deceased occasionally and therefore, the complainant Amol Dabholkar knew the voice and there was no reason why his testimony regarding the voice recognition of the accused should be discarded. She further submitted that the finger print of the accused was found on the steel container which corroborated his presence in the room. The recovery which was at the instance of the accused was the factor which clearly established that the accused had murdered the lady and had robbed her gold ornaments. She submitted, therefore, that the finding of the trial court may be confirmed and the appeal may be dismissed. Findings :-