SHYAMRAO RAMCHANDRA DHAYAGUDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal impugns the judgment and order of the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur whereby the appellant has been convicted for offences punishable under section 302, 364 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and payment of fine.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the incident has arisen as under:

(3.) The prosecution has examined 26 witnesses in order to prove the guilt of the appellant. PW2 and PW3 are child witnesses. PW2 Sonali is the sister of the victim. PW3 is one of the children who were playing with them on that fateful day. PW4 is Bahubali who PW2 had claimed had beaten her. PW5 is a relative of the accused who had met him on 3.1.2001 i.e., a day after the victim and the accused were last seen together. He claims that the accused had confessed to have murdered the victim. PW6, PW7, PW8, PW9 are witnesses who have seen the appellant with the victim on the night of 2.1.2000. PW7 has seen them going towards the forest. PW10, the father of the victim is the complainant. PW11 is an attendant at the telephone booth who claims that the appellant came to the booth on 3.1.2001 at around 11.30am to make a phone call. PW12, a relative of the accused has also claimed that the appellant had confessed to him of having committed the crime. PW13, PW14, PW22, PW23, PW25 and PW26 are all the police personnel who were involved in the investigation of the crime and arrest of the accused. PW15, 18, 19, 20 and 21 are the panch witnesses who have deposed to the spot panchanama, seizure panchanama and the arrest panchanama. PW16 is the organiser of Jagran Gondhal programme, who had been approached by the accused to organise a programme. PW17 is the Doctor who conducted the postmortem examination.