LAXMAN BABURAO PADWAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the appeal was called out, none appeared for the accused. The matter is listed for final hearing. The accused was represented by an advocate appointed by this Court. With the assistance of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we have scrutinised the evidence on record and re-appreciated the evidence. We, therefore, proceed to decide the matter on merits on scrutiny and perusal of the record.

(2.) The prosecution story, stated briefly, is that on 23rd September, 1991, one Atmaram Shripad Pote found a dead body of a female in his well in the field. He, therefore, reported the matter to the police, on the basis of which, the police registered an accidental death and started investigations under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The body was removed from the well. Panchanama was drawn and post-mortem was conducted. During the investigation, the police sought identification of the dead body and, according to the police, nobody could identify the dead body and, therefore, the dead body was cremated. However, in spite of agreement, the investigation continued and ultimately the accused was arrested, interrogated and finally charge-sheeted. Factually, therefore, the body was identified as one belonging to Shaila, daughter of P.W.4. Ultimately, the police, on certain statements made during the investigation, charge-sheeted the accused under Sections 302, 201, 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). After the charge-sheet was filed, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, committed him for trial to the Sessions Court. In the Sessions Court, in all, 16 witnesses were examined and on appreciation of the evidence, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the accused was guilty of the offence charged and, therefore, proceeded to convict the accused under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and sentence to suffer imprisonment for life. The learned Sessions Judge, however, acquitted the accused of all the other charges.

(3.) A perusal of the entire evidence on record shows that there is absolutely no evidence to connect the accused with the crime. There is also no evidence that the dead body was that of Shaila. There is no identification of the dead body at all. It appears that the learned trial Judge has relied on the evidence of the brother of the victim (P.W.2) who deposed that the accused and the victim were having cordial relationship - probably they were in love with each other - and there were several meetings between the accused and the victim. To almost all meetings, P.W.2 was a party. In fact, he was a messenger between the two. It appears from his deposition that he was supporting his sister in her friendship with the accused. His entire deposition reveals no grudge against the accused either in his mind or the victim's mind, assuming that the victim was Shaila.