MOHAN MADHAV CHAURASIYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these Appeals are decided by this common judgment and order because they arise out of the same impugned judgment and order. The Appellant Mohan Chaurasiya in Criminal Appeal No.1043/2015 was the original accused No.1 in Sessions Case Nos.271/2013 along with 552/2013 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay. The Appellant Ramdeen Loniya in Criminal Appeal No.689/2016 was the original accused No.2 in the same case. For the sake of convenience, both the Appellants are referred to by their original status as the accused, in the following discussion. The learned Judge, vide judgment and order dtd. 9/2/2015 convicted both of them for commission of the offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with 34 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000.00 each and in default to suffer SI for fifteen days. They were acquitted from the charges of commission of offence punishable under Sec. 341 read with 34 of IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the deceased Samsher was in employment of one Zulphikar Abdul Sattar Ghachi. The accused No.1 Mohan was also employed with Zulphikar. According to the prosecution case, said Zulphikar had two shops - one was a stationery shop and the other was a juice center. Samsher had joined him only a couple of days before the incident. He was asked to work in the stationery shop. The accused No.1 Mohan was already working with Zulphikar in his juice center. After the day's work, the deceased Samsher and the accused No.1 Mohan used to sleep in the juice center. The incident occurred in the night between 22nd and 23/11/2012. Zulphikar's father had seen both the accused and Samsher in the juice center before he left from there. The accused No.2 Ramdeen was the accused No.1's friend who used to meet him often. Zulphikar came to his juice center at around 10.00 a.m. on 23/11/2012. The juice center was closed with its shutter down. Zulphikar knocked on the shutter but there was no response. He opened the shutter and went inside. He saw that Samsher was lying on the floor. His hands were tied. His face was covered with a cloth. He alarmed everyone in the neighbourhood. A doctor was called, who declared Samsher to be dead. The police were informed. Before opening the shutter, Zulphikar had tried to contact accused No.1 Mohan telephonically but there was no response. The accused No.1 Mohan was not found. The police were informed accordingly. The FIR was lodged by Zulphikar at Deonar police station vide C.R. No.236/2012. The investigation was carried out. The accused No.1 Mohan was arrested from his native place on 28/11/2012. The accused No.2 Ramdin was arrested on 22/2/2013. The investigation continued and after completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was filed. The prosecution examined seven witnesses including the first informant Zulphikar, his father Abdul Sattar Abdulla Ghachi, a neighbouring tea-stall owner, an autorickshaw driver who has seen the accused in the night, the Medical Officer who conducted the postmortem examination and two investigating officers. The defence of the accused was of total denial. The accused No.1 Mohan stated in his examination under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. that he was a poor person. He was falsely implicated in that case. He added that he was at his native place and he was arrested from there. Importantly, he further stated that he never came to Mumbai.

(3.) Learned Judge considered the evidence on record, the defence of the accused, the submissions made on both sides and then recorded his conclusion as mentioned earlier. The learned Judge specifically relied on the following circumstances for convicting both the Appellants. The learned Judge has enumerated those circumstances in paragraph-56 of his judgment and order, which are as under :