SANJAY SHANKAR JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -

(2.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment dated 14th/15th September, 1993 in Sessions Case No.327 of 1990 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Court, Greater Bombay. Bombay. Heard Mr. Dukhade, the learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. M.P.Galeria, the learned A.P.P. for the State.

(3.) THE fact that Shankar met with a homicidal death has been satisfactorily proved by medical evidence. P.W. 10 Dr. Vanmore is the doctor who conducted post-mortem on the dead body of Shankar on 1-1-1990. THE doctor noticed the following external injuries :- 1. Lacerated wound over frontal region 10 cm x 3 cm with retraction scalp skin flap. 2. C.L.W. over frontal region 6 cm x 5 cm size with frontal bone broken. 3. Lacerated wound over occipital region 4 cm x 0.05 cm size scalp deep (o.5) 4. Small seven injuries over chest and abdomen on size of 1.5 cm x 0.8 on size skin deep. 5. Abrasions over abdomen present horizontal skin deep. 6. Brusing over Rt. forearm dorsal side and Rt. shoulder on back present. 7. Small ten injuries over neck 1 cm x 0.5 cm. skin deep. THEn on dissection, the doctor noticed the following internal injuries :- "Head : Brusing below scalp at Lt. temporal region and occipital region with haemorrhage present below scalp. Skull : 1. Fracture frontal bone., fracture Lt. temporal bone fracture, occipital bone. Brain : Brain matter exposed at frontal region moninges teared. Chorax : Brusing below crest at Lt. side congested. Left Lung : Congested laceration of left lung of mid-zone." THE doctor has noticed that the liver had been ruptured. According to the doctor, the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to injuries to vital organs. He noticed that injuries 1 to 3 and 5 and 6 can be caused by hard and blunt substance, whereas injuries 4 and 7 could be caused by a sharp cutting instrument. He has further opined that in normal circumstances injuries 1 to 3 are fatal and are sufficient to cause death of a person. He has issued a post-mortem report which is Ex.27. In the cross-examination, the doctor has admitted that injuries 1 to 3 can be caused if a rickshaw dashes against a compound wall. But no question is put about whether other injuries found on the dead body could have been caused by such an accident. In our view, the doctor's evidence is very clear and convincing and it is clearly proved that Shankar met with a homicidal death.