DATTATRAY S/O. MUNJA KUNDKAR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2017-11-282
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: AURANGABAD)
Decided on November 13,2017

Dattatraya Munja Kundkar Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.M.DHAVALE,J. - (1.) The accused, who has been convicted on the basis of evidence of last seen together for offence u/s 302 of IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default, rigorous imprisonment for six months, has filed this appeal.
(2.) The facts relevant for deciding this appeal may be stated as follows : The FIR Exh. 37 is lodged by Gaulanbai, wife of the Namdeo, on 29.10.98 on the basis of which crime was registered at C.R. No. 96/98 at Shirsala Police Station (Beed). As per FIR, deceased Namdeo, aged 30 years, was married to Gaulanbai and was residing with her and two sons Rajaram aged 13 years and Bhagwat aged 11 years at Karewadi, Tq. Parali. The deceased was habitual drunkard. On 28.10.98, at 11:00 a.m., his wife PW3 Gaulanbai went for labour work in agricultural field. That time her husband was alone in the house. He was not doing any work. When PW3 Gaulanbai returned to her house at 7:30 p.m., her husband was not there. He did not return in the night. Hence she and her mother-in- law made inquiry about Namdeo, but they did not get any clue. On the next day, in the morning at 11:00 a.m. PW3 - Gaulanbai came from Karewadi to Shirsala and made inquiry about her husband. Then she started proceeding to her maternal house at Revali. Then one unknown person told her that one drunkard was lying on the boundary of Shirsala and Karewadi and several persons had gathered there. PW3 went there and found that her husband was lying there dead with injuries to his neck, both elbows, back and private parts. Accordingly, she lodged FIR at Exh. 27 at 3:00 p.m. against unknown persons. The crime was registered and was investigated into. Autopsy was conducted on the body. The inquest panchanama Exh.70 and spot panchanama Exh. 18 were drawn and clothes of the deceased were seized under seizure memorandum Exh. 20. The further inquiry revealed that, witness no. 5 Sangram and witness no.6 Haridas had seen Namdeo in the company of the accused. There was evidence that the accused and deceased had gone to one Laxmibai where they purchased liquor and consumed it. Deceased was in the company of the accused from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and both of them were in drunken situation. The inquiry also revealed that the accused alone returned by Jeep in the night at 11:00 p.m. The Post-mortem report revealed that, it was a case of homicidal death by throttling. The viscera preserved was sent to Chemical Analysis, which revealed no poison. The accused came to be arrested on 31.10.98. His clothes were seized on 02.11.98. The seized articles were forwarded to the office of Chemical Analyzer. No blood was found on the clothes of the accused. After completion of inquiry, the charge-sheet was submitted in the court.
(3.) In due course, the case was committed to the court of Sessions. The ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai framed charge against the accused u/s 302/34 IPC . The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses. The ld. Additional Sessions Judge accepted the evidence and held the accused guilty and convicted & sentenced him as referred to above. Hence this appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.