Case Note & Summary
The appellant, wife of the deceased Mangesh Lanjekar, filed an appeal against the judgment and order dated 14/03/2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Sessions Case No.24/2014, acquitting Respondent Nos.2 to 5 (original accused) of offences punishable under Sections 302, 341, 364, 427, 115 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case was that the deceased and his brother (informant) ran a cable business, and there was business rivalry with accused No.3 Ravindra Gunjal, who had previously worked with them. On 15/08/2013, the deceased went to attend a petrol pump opening ceremony in his car. Later, the informant received a call from a friend that something had happened to the deceased. The deceased's body was found in a burnt car. The prosecution alleged that the accused kidnapped and murdered the deceased. The trial court acquitted all accused, finding the evidence insufficient. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence including the testimony of the informant, the alleged last seen witness (who turned hostile), and other witnesses. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The motive of business rivalry was not sufficient to connect the accused with the crime. The last seen theory was not established as the witness turned hostile. The trial court's findings were not perverse. The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Appreciation of Evidence - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal will not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. The trial court's appreciation of evidence and conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt was found to be plausible and not perverse. (Paras 1-16) B) Evidence Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Last Seen Theory - The prosecution's case based on last seen evidence and motive was not supported by credible witnesses. The alleged last seen witness turned hostile and the other witnesses were not reliable. The chain of circumstances was incomplete. (Paras 7-15) C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal Against Acquittal - The High Court's power to reverse an acquittal is limited. Unless the trial court's view is wholly unreasonable or perverse, the appellate court should not substitute its own view. (Paras 1-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court is perverse and liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of Respondent Nos.2 to 5.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal
- Appreciation of evidence
- Circumstantial evidence
- Motive
- Last seen theory
- Credibility of witnesses
- Benefit of doubt
