AJIT VISHWANATH BORADE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, the original accused no. 1, has questioned the correctness of the judgment and order dated 16th January 2009 passed by the Ad -hoc Additional Sessions Judge -1, Nashik in Sessions Case No. 205 of 2007 thereby convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. The appellant has also been sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/ - and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

(2.) THE facts which can be enumerated from the record and are necessary to decide the present appeal can briefly be stated thus:

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that a minute perusal of the entire evidence on record shows that there is no material to prove the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He submitted stated that except Investigating Officer and PW -8 panch to the seizure of articles, no independent witness either has supported the case of the prosecution or has been examined by the prosecution in support of its contention. He submitted that that as a matter of fact the appellant suffered 17% burn injuries while trying to save the deceased Smt. Usha. That the Investigating Officer has suppressed the said fact while filing the chargesheet. He has further submitted that the Chemical Analyzer's report of the clothes of the appellant has not been brought on record by the Investigating Officer. He submitted that as a matter of fact while saving the deceased Smt. Usha the clothes of the appellant were also burned and the said fact can be discerned from the panchanama which is at Exhibit 43. He lastly contended that after taking into consideration the evidence of PW -4 i.e. officer from the fire brigade who extinguished the fire from the bungalow, it can be clearly seen that it is a case of accident and not murder. He submitted that the Investigating Officer has not investigated the said aspect of short -circuit during the course of investigation and therefore charge of murder is unsustainable. He therefore urged before us that the present appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be acquitted from all the charges levelled against him.