STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. POCHA LACHAMA MUNKEWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Deceased Vistari Rama, who was aged about 25 years, was resident of village Yella, tahsil Sironcha, in district Chandrapur. It seems from the record that the deceased had gone in the field for keeping watch, as usual, on 5th Dec. 1973. His headless dead body was found lying in Gitali Jungle in the morning on 6th Dec. 1973, which jungle is between village Yella and village Gitali. Village Gitali came into existence when refugees from East Pakisthan were rehabilitated at that place about 7 or 8 years back. Deceased Vistari had his field near Gitali jungle and he was last seen alive on 5th Dec. 1973, when he had gone to attend to his field admeasuring about 8 acres, out of which 6 acres was under juar cultivation. Accused No. 1 Pocha Lachama, the appellant before this Court, was helping deceased Vistari as a partner in cultivation. As deceased Vistari did not return, Gangubai (P.W. 11), his mother, became worried and consequently she approached accused No. 1 Pocha Lachama tosearch for him. Accused No. 1 Pocha Lachama did likewise for a couple of hours in the village, but he could not trace Vistari. Then he along with villagers carried out the search everywhere, but the search was abandoned on account of night. On the next day morning again, the search was started and ultimately the dead body of Vistari without head was found.

(2.) According to the prosecution, original accused No. 1 Pocha Lachama, committed the murder of Vistari and has thus committed the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Apart from the present accused, original accused no. 2 Pocha Bhima and one Laxman Penta were also prosecuted for the said offence. It was the case of the prosecution that all the 3 accused persons in furtherance of their common intention committed murder of deceased Vistari. It seems from the record the original accused no. 3 died after the committal proceedings, and therefore, ultimately the present appellant Pocha Lachama and original accused no. 2 Pocha Bhima were tried for the said offence in the Sessions Court.

(3.) The prosecution was not able to adduce any direct evidence to connect the accused persons with the crime. The evidence led by the prosecution is circumstantial in nature and mainly consists of the discoveries made by accused Pocha Lachama whereby he discovered-(l) the ornaments, which, according to the prosecution, were on the person of Vistari, (2) the discovery of the head of deceased Vistari and (3) the axe and its handle with which, according to the prosecution, the said offence was committed. The prosecution also relied upon the seizure of the blood stained clothes from the house of the accused Pocha Lachama.