YOGESH @ GOLU Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the Appeals, one by the Appellant - Yogesh @ Golu Raghunath Chaudhari and other by the State, are directed against the Judgment and Order dtd. 23/10/2019, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nandurbar, in Sessions Case No.21 of 2018.

(2.) Prosecution's case, as revealed from the Police Report, is as under :-

(3.) It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Accused that the eye witnesses examined by the Prosecution cannot be relied as their previous statement were recorded belatedly. There is no explanation for delayed statement of the eye witnesses. Though it has come in the evidence of Investigating Officer that the CCTV footages were seized, the mandatory certificate under Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act is not brought in evidence and therefore, the said electronic evidence would be of no assistance to the Prosecution. Though recovery of weapon used in the incident is shown at the instance of Appellant - Yogesh @ Golu, no blood was found on the said Article and, therefore, the said recovery will not help the Prosecution. The learned Trial Court convicted the Accused without taking into consideration the said vital aspects. As no reliance can be placed on the evidence available on record, the Order of conviction be set aside and the Appeal against conviction be allowed. He further submitted that as it was not established by the Prosecution that Deceased belong to SC or ST, the acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court under the SC ST Act needs no interference.