Full Text
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 101 OF 2025
Laxman Dita Kakan, ]
Age : 58 years, Occupation : Labour, ]
Resident of near Singapore International School, ]
Mira Road, Thane – 401 104 ]
Presently lodged as a life convict in ]
Nashik Road Central Prison, Nashik ] … Appellant
Through Public Prosecutor, ]
Address : Office of Public Prosecutor, ]
2nd
Floor, PWD Building, High Court, ]
Fort, Mumbai – 400 032 ] … Respondent
Mr. Ashish I. Satpute, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
JUDGMENT
1) The Appellant has questioned correctness of Judgment and Order dated 10th July 2024, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thane, in Sessions Case No. 6 of 2021, convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for three months.
2) Heard Mr. Gharte, learned appointed Advocate by Legal Aid Committee to represent the Appellant and Mr. Satpute, learned APP for Respondent, State. Perused entire record.
3) The name of the deceased is Deva @ Devilal and the time of incident is the intervening night of 3rd May 2020 and 4th May 2020. The place of incident is the room where the Appellant and deceased Deva @ Devilal used to reside. It is the prosecution case that, the Appellant and deceased were working as labourers with Kalubhai Devjibhai Salvi (PW 12) at Singapore International School, situated at Mira Road (E), District Thane. PW 12 was given a contract of gardening of the said school. The deceased Deva @ Devilal was the Supervisor whereas the Appellant was one of the worker, working under him as a Gardener. The Appellant and deceased were residing on the first floor of the labour quarters of the said school and they used to sleep together. The deceased, Supervisor was in-charge of giving monthly salaries to the Gardeners and additional amount of Rs. 200/- on a weekly basis for their expenses. On 3rd May 2020, the deceased paid Rs.200/each to all the Gardeners, however did not pay it to the Appellant, as he had not attended the work from 30th April 2020 to 1st May 2020. A quarrel ensued on the said count in the night of 3rd May 2020. Thereafter, all the labourers went to sleep in their respective rooms. As usual the Appellant and Deva @ Devilal (deceased) were sleeping in an open area of first floor of the staff quarters. That, at about 7.00 a.m. on 4th May 2020, Soma Dharmaji Mena (PW 6) i.e. informant got up and came out of his room and noticed that, Deva @ Devilal was lying in his bed in a pool of blood, motionless and the Appellant was sitting beside him. PW 6, informant called other labourers. Labourers reached the scene of offence and noticed that, the Appellant was sitting in front of the deceased and upon being asked by the labourers, the Appellant informed them, as he did not get the said amount of Rs. 200/-, in the intervening night, when the deceased was sleeping, he assaulted him with an iron hammer. The deceased was immediately taken to Indira Gandhi Hospital where he was declared dead and consequent therefrom, FIR was registered.
4) Upon receipt of information, API Ganesh A. Bhamare (PW 11) rushed to the spot of incident. He conducted inquest panchnama (Exh. 10) and spot panchnama (Exh. 11). The weapon used in the present crime i.e. an iron hammer was lying at the scene of the offence and the same was seized by him while effecting the spot panchnama cum seizure panchnama. After completing investigation, PW 11 submitted charge-sheet in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane.
5) As the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the said case to the Court of Sessions as contemplated under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C.
6) The prosecution in support of its case examined in all 12 witnesses. After recording evidence of the witnesses, the trial Court recorded statement of the Appellant under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.. The said statement is at Exh. 64. The defence of the Appellant is of total denial. In support of his defence, the Appellant did not examine any witness. Appellant has admitted inquest panchnama (Exh. 10), spot panchnama (Exh. 11), sketch of the spot panchnama (Exh.12) and clothes seizure panchnama of the deceased (Exh. 13), under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C.. Learned trial Court after recording evidence and hearing the learned Advocate for the respective parties has convicted and sentenced the Appellant as noted above.
7) Mr. Gharte, learned appointed Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that, there is a gross delay in registration of the crime. He submitted that, the statements of PW Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 10 to whom the alleged extra judicial confession was given by the Appellant are stereotyped and therefore there is scope to have doubt about its genuineness. He submitted that, as the Appellant was shocked and unable to react after seeing the dead body of Deva @ Devilal, he did not leave the said place and therefore the prosecution has implicated him in the crime. He submitted that, the deceased was sleeping in an open space and there is every possibility that, somebody else with ulterior motive have committed murder of deceased with the said iron hammer, which was already lying at the construction site. He therefore prayed that, the Appellant may be given benefit of doubt by allowing the Appeal.
8) Per contra learned APP opposed the Appeal and submitted that, the evidence on record is fully reliable and leaves no scope for having any doubt about it. He submitted that, the Appellant has given extra judicial confessions to his co-workers, who immediately rushed to the scene of offence and the said confessions are admissible in evidence.
9) The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. The circumstances propounded by the prosecution are i) motive, ii) last seen together, iii) extra judicial confession given by the Appellant to his coworkers namely PW 2, PW 3 PW 6 (informant) and PW 10, iv) medical evidence, v) recovery of hammer from the spot, vi) chemical analysis (CA) and vii) the evidence of blood stains on the clothes of the Appellant with human origin and non offering any explanation by the Appellant while recording his statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C..
10) As noted in the foregoing paragraphs, the Appellant has working as labourer with Kalubhai Salvi (PW 12), who was awarded the contract of gardening by the Singapore International School situated at Mira Road (E), Thane. As the Appellant did not attend the work from 30th April 2020 to 1st May 2020, the deceased, who was his Supervisor did not pay him an amount of Rs. 200/-, which was given to other labourers. This is the motive propounded by the prosecution for the commission of the crime by the Appellant.
11) The labourers employed at the said Singapore International School have seen the Appellant and deceased sleeping in an open area on the first floor of the staff quarters in the night of 3rd May 2020. PW Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 10 have also seen the Appellant sitting beside the dead body of Deva @ Devilal in the morning after 7.00 a.m. of 4th May 2020. The body of Deva @ Devilal was motionless and blood was oozing from his head. An iron hammer was lying near the scene of offene, which was also having blood stains. The Appellant has given extra judicial confession to PW Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 10 admitting the fact that, as he was not paid with Rs. 200/- by the deceased for the work done by him, when the deceased was sleeping in the night, he assaulted him with an iron hammer.
12) Dr. Ankita Pandit (PW 4) had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Deva @ Devilal and had noticed following injuries:
1. Laceration present over right forehead 9 cm from the midline and about 2 cm above the right eyebrow (2cm x 2cm)
2. Nasal bone # seen. (about 2cm, horizontal)
3. Contusion abrasion present over right zygomatico maxillary region of size 10 cm x 6 cm, irregular margins, red
4. On scalp disection, underscalp hematoma present over right frontopacieto temporal region roughly 18 cm x 12 cm, red and over left mid parietal region of size 8 cm x 5 cm, red
5. Depressed fracture present over right frontal region of seize 6 x 4 cm c acumilinear fracture
6. Line traversing towards right temporal region of 10 cm and terminting in MCF c infiltration of blood at fractured ends, red in colour,
7. Anterior cramial fossa fractured on right side with infiltration of blood at fractured ends, red She has stated that, the cause of death was due to head injuryhomicidal.
13) Perusal of spot panchnama indicates that, an iron hammer weighing about 10 k.g. having an iron rod to it admeasuring 2 feet 8 inches was found at the scene of offence. The Investigating Officer (PW 11) while arresting the Appellant had noticed that, the clothes of the Appellant were stained with blood. The chemical analysis of the said blood stains reveals that, it was of human species origin having blood group of AB.
13.1) Record clearly indicates that, the Appellant had not suffered any injury and therefore there is no question of his blood being oozing out on his own clothes.
14) At this stage, a useful reference can be made to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of, Vadivelu Thevar Vs. The State of Madras, reported in AIR 1957 SC, 614, wherein the Supreme Court has enumerated three categories of witnesses namely, (i) wholly reliable (ii) wholly unreliable (iii) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable.
15) Perusal of evidence of PW Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 10 clearly reveals that, their evidence is fully reliable and there cannot be any second opinion about it. The said persons are natural witnesses, who rushed to the spot immediately after PW No.6(informant) noticed the dead body of Deva @ Devilal and the presence of the Appellant thereof.
16) The blood group of the Appellant so also deceased could not be ascertained, as the said blood was haemolysed. However, the Appellant has not offered any explanation in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. about the said circumstances, which the prosecution has propounded against him. The case of the Appellant is of total denial.
17) After taking into consideration the aforenoted circumstances, we are of the clear opinion that, the Appellant is the only author of the crime and there is no scope for having even an iota of doubt to give benefit of the same to him.
18) Perusal of the impugned Judgment and Order indicates that, the learned Judge of the trial Court has not committed any error either on facts or on law while convicting and sentencing the Appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
19) In view thereof we find that, there are no merits in the Appeal and it is accordingly dismissed.
20) In view of dismissal of Appeal, Interim Application Nos.301 of 2025 and 302 of 2025, pending therein do not survive and are accordingly disposed off.
21) Before parting with the Judgment, we deem it appropriate to place on record the efforts put in by Mr. Gharte, who was appointed by Legal Aid Committee, to espouse the cause of the Appellant. Mr. Gharte was thoroughly prepared with the Appeal and assisted this Court in arriving at a proper conclusion. ( SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )