SANTOSH JAGANNATH PINGLE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellant/convicted accused is challenging order dated 29th June 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No.25 of 2009, thereby convicting him of the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 years.

(2.) Facts, in brief, leading to the prosecution of the appellant/convicted accused and the resultant conviction, can be summarized thus :

(3.) I have heard Mrs.Megha Bajoria, the learned advocate appointed to represent the appellant/convicted accused at the costs of the State. She vehemently argued that the dying declaration allegedly recorded by PW3 Yashwant Bhosale, Police Head Constable, cannot be relied upon for basing conviction in such a serious offence. Meera Pingle (since deceased) sustained burn injuries on 23rd September 2008 and she, ultimately, succumbed to burn injuries on 28 th September 2008. As such, there were ample opportunities with the prosecution to get the dying declaration of Meera Pingle (since deceased) recorded through the Executive Magistrate. This was not done. Similarly, according to the learned advocate, the dying declaration allegedly recorded by PW3 Yashwant Bhosale, Police Head Constable, is not corroborated in material particulars by other evidence adduced by the prosecution. Except the dying declaration, there is no other evidence to connect the appellant/convicted accused with the crime in question, and therefore, by granting benefit of doubt, he needs to be acquitted. The learned advocate further argued that the sentence imposed on the appellant/convicted accused is also harsh.