Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rupesh Radhakisan Chaudhari, was convicted by the trial court for the murder of his wife, Jaishree, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence. Jaishree was found with a stab wound to her neck near her parental home in Ambi on the evening of 07.04.2011. Her mother Latabai (PW1) discovered her after hearing a cry and saw her bleeding. Jaishree was taken to hospital but was declared dead on arrival. The investigation revealed that the appellant had visited Jaishree earlier, and there were phone calls between them. A motive was suggested: the appellant suspected Jaishree of infidelity, and there was an anonymous phone call before the marriage warning of a love affair. After the murder, the appellant was absconding and was arrested on 09.04.2011. He led the police to recover a knife and his blood-stained clothes under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Mobile phones were also seized. The prosecution examined 16 witnesses, including Latabai, the brother Prakash (PW2), doctors who conducted postmortem, panchas, and nodal officers for mobile records. The appellant, in his statement under Section 313 CrPC, denied all allegations. The trial court convicted the appellant and acquitted co-accused Deepak. In appeal, the appellant argued that the circumstantial evidence was not sufficient, the recoveries were not voluntary, the panch witness turned hostile, the knife was not sealed, and the investigation was flawed. The appellate court heard extensive arguments. The provided text does not include the court's reasoning and final decision.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the circumstantial evidence on record was sufficient to prove the guilt of the appellant for the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt.
Case Details
2020 LawText (BOM) (09) 8
Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2014
Ravindra V. Ghuge, B. U. Debadwar
V.D. Sapkal (Senior Advocate), P.S. Dikle (Advocate) for appellant; K.S. Patil (APP) for respondent
Rupesh Radhakisan Chaudhari
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
Remedy Sought
Appellant seeks to set aside his conviction and acquittal.
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted by trial court for murder of his wife; contends evidence is insufficient and investigation flawed.
Previous Decisions
Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, convicted appellant in Sessions Case No. 149 of 2011 under Section 302 IPC on 25.09.2014; co-accused acquitted.
Issues
Whether the circumstantial evidence, including motive, last seen together, and recoveries, was sufficient to convict the appellant for murder under Section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the disclosure statements under Section 27 of the Evidence Act were admissible and voluntary.
Whether the testimony of hostile panch witness could be relied upon.
Whether the investigation was fair and free from defects affecting the prosecution case.
Submissions/Arguments
Case based on circumstantial evidence; inconsistencies in witness testimonies (hands tied vs not tied).
Handkerchief used to tie hands not recovered.
Panch witness to disclosure panchanama (Exhibit 42) turned hostile and denied signing voluntarily.
Disclosure statements not made under free will; appellant handcuffed when taken to recovery spot.
Knife not sealed at the place of recovery and place accessible to public.
Mobile phone CellX not proved to belong to appellant; no call data records linking appellant to crime.
Recovery of blood-stained clothes on 12.04.2011 delayed; chain of circumstances incomplete.
No independent witnesses to recovery; investigation flawed and biased.
Co-accused acquitted, indicating weak evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
This case is wholly based on circumstantial evidence and a motive for the appellant to kill his wife. (Para 3)
Rupesh gave a memorandum and a panchanama u/s 27 of the Evidence Act was prepared, at Exh.55, recorded in between 08:00 am to 08:15 am on 12.04.2011. (Para 4 l)
the appellant/ Rupesh had reached Ambi between 02:00 to 02:30 p.m. to meet Jaishree (Para 4 d)
Procedural History
Appellant convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, on 25.09.2014 in Sessions Case No. 149 of 2011. He filed Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2014 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench. The appeal was heard on 22, 23 and 25 September 2020.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 27, 65
