RAHUL BHIKULAL KASAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, the applicant Rahul Bhikulal Kasat i.e. the appellant/original accused No.5 in Sessions Case No. 218 of 2021, is seeking suspension of substantive sentence imposed upon him under judgment and order dtd. 18/10/2024 in the aforesaid sessions case, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani i.e. the learned trial Court and releasing him on bail during the pendency of appeal.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, deceased Suresh Karwa was living with his wife Seema i.e. PW-50 and son Yash. Present applicant/accused being a wealthy business- man from Selu, established cordial family relations with Karwa family. Thereafter he developed illicit relations with wife of the deceased. After some time wife of the deceased wanted to end the said relationship, but the applicant/accused threatened her for not to do so. He also threatened her that he would kill her family member. When the said fact was brought to the notice of the deceased by his wife, the deceased told her to keep calm. The applicant/ accused then hatched conspiracy alongwith other accused for committing murder of Suresh Karwa. On 2/5/2021 when Suresh Karwa was returning from his agricultural field towards Selu, a scene was created near Khari bridge as if he was given dash by trax jeep driven by accused No.4 and thereafter accused No.2 Vinod hit Suresh with iron rod on head resulting into his death. Thereafter when the body of deceased Suresh Karwa was recovered, an offence of accidental death was registered by his brother Satish Karwa under Ss. 304-A , 279 and 427 of I.P.C. initially. However, when the audio clip of conversation between applicant/accused and wife of deceased became viral, offence under Sec. 302 and 120-B of I.P.C. was added to the earlier registered crime. Thereafter on completion of investigation, trial was conducted by the learned trial Court resulting into conviction of present applicant for the offence punishable under Ss. 302 read with Sec. 34 and 120-B of I.P.C. Out of other accused, accused Nos.2 to 4 were also convicted.

(3.) Learned senior counsel Mr. Deshmukh for the applicant/accused submitted that the present applicant is not at all involved in the alleged crime and Suresh i.e. deceased in the instant case, had in fact died due to accident caused by one truck bearing registration No. MH-22-AN-8085 as per initial report. He pointed out that PW1-Satish, who had lodged report of accident, has admitted that there are in fact two eye witnesses namely Khandu Banduke and Dadasaheb Lipane to the accident and their statements were also recorded by earlier Investigating Officer, but the prosecution, for false implication of the present applicant, suppressed those statements. According to him, present case is based on circumstantial evidence in form of electronic evidence which is not at all admissible since recovery of those instruments is highly doubtful and the panch witness to that discovery/recovery has not supported the same.