Case Note & Summary
The present criminal appeal was filed by Accused No.3, Gopinath Vitthal Sable, challenging his conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 319 of 2007. The trial court found him guilty of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sentencing him to life imprisonment and seven years rigorous imprisonment respectively, along with fines. The prosecution case stemmed from the disappearance of a car driver, Ajay Kadu, who was last seen dropping a passenger at Mumbai airport on 8th April 2006. When he did not return to Pune, his father lodged two missing complaints with Chaturshringi Police Station on 19th and 23rd September 2006. In the meantime, on 9th April 2006, the police at Panvel discovered an unidentified dead body near a road; a postmortem examination revealed that death was caused by throttling and injuries to the testes, pointing to homicide. The investigation remained dormant until the crime branch took over. A breakthrough came via the deceased’s mobile phone. The police traced its IMEI number to a SIM card that was still active. Through inquiries with the service provider, they identified the user as one Mohan Barve, who had purchased the handset from Shivaji Pardhi, who in turn had bought it from Accused No.3 (the appellant). This led to the appellant’s arrest on 7th January 2007 and the recovery of a gold ring belonging to the deceased, which the appellant had pawned at a jeweller’s shop in Thane for Rs. 1,600. A co-accused, Raju Dandekar, made a statement that led to the recovery of a wrist watch of the deceased from his house. Another accused, Selvan Kumar, disclosed the location of a car tape recorder that had been fitted in the Indica car. Accused Iranna pointed out the place where the murder occurred and where the car was abandoned; the car was subsequently found in the Vikhroli area of Mumbai. After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet, and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The trial court framed charges under Sections 302/34 and 394/34 IPC and, after trial, convicted the accused. The appellant, aggrieved by the conviction, preferred the present appeal. The legal issues that would ordinarily arise include whether the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, whether the recoveries under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act were voluntary and reliable, and whether the identification of the deceased’s belongings by his relatives was credible. Since the extracted judgment text ends abruptly after outlining the prosecution version, the submissions of the counsel, the court’s analysis of evidence, the reasoning on the points of law, and the final decision of the High Court are not available in the provided document. Consequently, the ratio decidendi and the ultimate outcome of the appeal cannot be ascertained from this extract.
Issue of Consideration
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 771 OF 2010
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (10) 91
Criminal Appeal No. 771 of 2010
S.S. Shinde, A.S. Gadkari
Vijay Garad, M.M. Deshmukh
The State of Maharashtra (through Chaturshringi Police Station)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder and robbery
Remedy Sought
Appellant seeks to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court and acquit him
Filing Reason
Appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and seven years rigorous imprisonment respectively, under Sections 302/34 and 394/34 IPC; dissatisfied with the trial court's judgment, he filed this appeal.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Sessions Judge, Pune convicted the appellant and three co-accused for offences under Sections 302/34 and 394/34 IPC on 17th July 2010. The other accused were also convicted but only the appellant (Accused No.3) filed this appeal.
Judgment Excerpts
This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 17th July, 2010, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.319 of 2007, thereby convicting the Appellant/Accused No.3 – Gopinath Vitthal Sable for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-.
During the investigation A.P.I. Milind Vasantrao Gaikwad [PW11] came to know that deceased Ajay was carrying with him mobile handset bearing IMEI No.357593009655302.
Mohan Barve [PW8] had purchased the said mobile from Shivaji Nathu Pardhi [PW7] of his own village. Therefore, the police reached said Shivaji. From him they gathered the information that he had purchased the said mobile from Accused No.3 Gopinath Vitthal Sable i.e. Appellant herein.
Accused Gopinath Sable made a statement before the police and the panch witnesses that he is ready to produce the gold ring of the deceased. Eventually he led the police and the panch witnesses to Thane to the jewellery shop of Satish Solanki [PW6]. Satish Solanki [PW6] upon seeing the Accused, produced the gold ring and gave information that Accused No.3 Gopinath i.e. Appellant herein, had kept the said gold ring with him by obtaining amount of Rs.1,600/-.
Procedural History
1. Deceased went missing on 08-04-2006. 2. Father filed first missing complaint on 19-09-2006 and second on 23-09-2006. 3. Unidentified body found by Panvel police on 09-04-2006, accidental death case registered. 4. Postmortem conducted same day, cause of death: throttling and injuries. 5. Investigation by Crime Branch, Pune, traced mobile phone to accused via chain of purchasers. 6. Accused No.3 (appellant) arrested on 07-01-2007. 7. Recoveries made: gold ring on 10-01-2007, wrist watch from Accused No.4 on 11-01-2007, car tape from Accused No.1 on 26-01-2007, Indica car located on 09-01-2007. 8. Chargesheet filed, case committed to Sessions Court. 9. Trial held, accused convicted on 17-07-2010. 10. Present appeal filed in 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 34, 394
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 27
