Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Nirmala Maruti Gunjal, Malanbai Ramesh Gunjal, Sakhubai Baban Shinde, and Maruti Ramesh Gunjal, were convicted by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, in Sessions Case No.79 of 2003 for offences under Section 302, 451, and 342 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution case was that on 15th October 2002, the deceased Sangita Mahadu Deore, a tenant of accused No.2 Malanbai, went out to answer the call of nature. Accused No.4 Maruti allegedly caught her hand and tried to rape her. When she shouted, accused No.2 Malanbai and accused No.1 Nirmala came and allegedly dragged her inside the house, where she was later found dead. The trial court convicted all four accused based on the testimony of PW1 (the deceased's husband) and circumstantial evidence. The appellants appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found that PW1's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable, as he claimed to have witnessed the incident but his presence was doubtful. The circumstantial evidence, including the recovery of a sari and a stone, did not conclusively link the appellants to the murder. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the appellants were entitled to the benefit of doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Benefit of Doubt - The appellants were convicted for murder based on circumstantial evidence including last seen theory and recovery of articles - The court found the evidence of the sole eyewitness (PW1) unreliable due to contradictions and improvements, and the circumstantial evidence insufficient to complete the chain - Held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellants are entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302, 451, and 342 IPC read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 15th November 2003 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik, in Sessions Case No.79 of 2003 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Inconsistent evidence
- Unreliable witnesses
- Circumstantial evidence
- Last seen theory
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 451 IPC
- Section 342 IPC
