Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mahesh @ Mahendra Mahadev Bambargekar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, for the murder of his half-brother Ravindra under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that the appellant and his father (accused no.2) had a motive because the deceased's salary was attached due to a loan taken by accused no.2. On 11 June 2009, the deceased returned home alone, and later his body was found with injuries. The prosecution relied on last seen evidence, recovery of a weapon, and motive. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the witnesses were interested and their testimony was inconsistent. The last seen witness was not reliable, and the recovery of the weapon was not credible. The court held that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, conviction set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires complete chain of circumstances pointing only to guilt - In the present case, the prosecution relied on motive, last seen, and recovery of weapon, but the witnesses were unreliable and contradictions existed - Held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence and testimony of interested witnesses is sustainable.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- motive
- last seen theory
- credibility of witnesses
- benefit of doubt
