Bombay High Court
Ramesh Rajmal Jain vs The State Of Maharashtra on 15 April, 2011
Author: B. H. Marlapalle
Bench: B. H. Marlapalle, U. D. Salvi
1
Appeals595.02+3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 595 OF 2002
Ramesh Rajmal Jain ... Appellant/Ori.
Accused No.11
v/s
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
ig ALONG WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 647 OF 2002
Mangilal Modilal Dave ... Appellant/Ori.
Accused No.12
v/s
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
ALONG WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 908 OF 2002
Namdeo Sardar Shinde ... Appellant/Ori.
Accused No.2.
v/s
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
ALONG WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 998 OF 2002
Sahebrao Gulab Kale ... Appellant/Ori.
Accused No.1
V/s
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr.Ganesh Gole, Advocate for the appellant in Criminal
Appeal Nos.908 of 2002 and 998 of 2002.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 :::
2
Appeals595.02+3
Mr.I.A.Bagaria, Advocate for the appellant in Criminal Appeal
No.595 of 2002.
Mrs.Anjali Patil, Advocate for the appellant in Criminal
Appeal No.647 of 2002.
Mr.H.J.Dedhia, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE &
U. D. SALVI, JJ.
RESERVED ON : March 18, 2011
PRONOUNCED ON : April 15, 2011
JUDGMENT (Per B. H. Marlapalle, J.):
1. These appeals filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code arise from the common judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Mumbai, in Sessions Case Nos.
189 of 1998, 570 of 1998, 1393 of 1998, and 328 of 2000. In all 16 accused came to be tried and accused Nos.1 to 9 and 13 to 16 were charged under Sections 396 of the Indian Penal Code i.e. decoity with murder and accused No.11 was charged under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, "I.P.C.") i.e. dishonestly receiving property stolen in the commission of a decoity by accused No.1 and accused No.12 was charged under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code for voluntarily assisting the accused in disposing off the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 3 Appeals595.02+3 stolen property in decoity. Accused No.10 Balaram Shinde was also alleged to be a member of the decoity gang but though arrested, he subsequently absconded. Hence, the trial continued against the remaining 15 accused. Accused Nos.1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13 to 16 remained as under-trial prisoners, whereas the other accused were released on bail.
By the impugned order, accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 have been convicted and sentenced for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-
for the offence punishable under Section 396 of I.P.C.
Accused No.11 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 412 of I.P.C., whereas accused No.12 has been convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 414 of I.P.C. Criminal Appeal No.592 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.11, Criminal Appeal No.647 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.12, Criminal Appeal No.908 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.2 and Criminal Appeal No.998 of 2002 has been filed by accused No.1. Convicted accused No.3 has not filed any appeal. Accused Nos.11 and 12 have been released on bail by this Court but other convicted accused i.e. accused Nos.1 to 3 are presently in jail. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are in jail right from 5.11.1997 uninterruptedly, whereas accused No.3 is in jail after his surrender consequent to the impugned ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 4 Appeals595.02+3 order of conviction and sentence. Thus accused Nos.1 and 2 have by now completed an actual sentence of more than 13 years, whereas accused No.3 has completed an actual sentence of about 9 years.
2. As per the prosecution case, PW-3 Dattatray Maruti Thopte who was the Station House Officer at the Malad Police Station in the suburb of Mumbai City had received an anonymous telephone call around 2.20 a.m. on 4.11.1997 (fateful night between 3rd and 4th of November, 1997) stating that three persons were lying with bleeding injuries in the compound of Pawanbaug Housing Society, Chincholi Phatak and near its gate. After recording the said message in the station diary he informed it to PW-19 Shri Katakdaund, Police Inspector and proceeded to the spot immediately for further enquiry. On reaching the spot he found the news to be correct and three persons were lying near the main entrance gate of Pawanbaug Housing Society in a pool of blood and a motorcycle was also lying at the site. PW-3 identified two police constables Ravindra Savant and Anant Arjun Kalal, who were on patrol duty on the same night as the injured and the third one was the watchman of the Pawanbaug Housing Society by name Ravindra Dubey.
Within a short span of time, a mobile van of Malad Police Station reached the spot and all the three injured were ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 5 Appeals595.02+3 shifted to Bhagwati Hospital. By then a crowd had gathered at the spot and PW-1 Vishvanathan Pille, an occupant of the ground floor flat assisted PW-3, who, in the local enquiry found that Flat No.303/304 on the third floor of building No.9 of the said Society was burgled. PW-3 suspected that the commission of house breaking and looting of valuables from the said flat must be by a gang of decoits. PW-19 Katakdaund, Police Inspector also reached the spot. In the meantime, a wireless message was received from Bhagwati Hospital that all the three victims taken in the police mobile van were declared dead before admission. PW-19 Katakdaund therefore recorded the statement of PW-3 Dattatray Thopte and C.R.No.539 of 1997 for the offences punishable under Sections 396 and 357 of I.P.C. came to be registered against unknown persons on the basis of the said complaint.
3. The dead bodies of all the three victims were sent for postmortem after preparing the inquest panchnama at Exh.
57. Dog squad and finger print experts were also called and PW-19 Katakdaund undertook the investigation. At the same time, PW-20 Arun Vitthalrao Wable, who was the night duty police inspector at Santacruz Police Station flashed the incident and red alert was given to all the police stations. He received a wireless message by about 4.00 a.m. that the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 6 Appeals595.02+3 decoits were suspected to be from the "Phasepardhi"
community. The statement of PW-6 Chandrabahadur Chudabahadurrao, who was the watchman of the neighbouring industrial unit i.e. Shripal Industries was recorded by PW-19 immediately after the incident.
Postmortem was performed on the dead bodies by PW-15 Dr.Vithal Hasha Vihurkar on 4.11.1997 and it was revealed that all the three persons died on account of head injuries at one and the same time. PW-1 Vishwanathan Narayan Pille led the police team to Flat No.303/304 on the third floor of building No.9 and it was noted that the occupants Jain family were out of station and an urgent message was given to them. The tube-lights in the flat were found switched on, two steel cupboards were found broken, clothes and jewellery boxes were were ransacked and panchnama at Exh.20 was drawn of the conditions of the flat. The Jain family reached Mumbai on 5.11.1997. As per PW-6, he had seen a gang of 15 to 16 persons coming from Pawanbaug Society and armed with sticks and iron bars and running away around 2.00 a.m. but he had not seen the actual incident in which three victims were killed in the compound of Pawanbaug Housing Society, past midnight of 3rd April, 1997.
4. PW-11 Dattatray Yeshwant Dal was the Police Sub-
Inspector attached to the Santacruz Police Station and he ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 7 Appeals595.02+3 had received secret information from the modus operandi that some of the accused involved in the incident had taken shelter in Kalachowki, Cottongreen area, and he caught hold of accused No.3 Subbarao at about 4.00 a.m. on 5.11.1997 from a lorry parked along the road side. Within half an hour and on the basis of the information obtained from accused No.3, PW-11 caught hold of accused No.1 Sahebrao Gulab Kale who was found sleeping on the footpath in the nearby area and accused No.4 Suresh Pawar, on the tip off. PW-11 Dattatray Dal took in custody accused No.2 Namdeo Shinde at about 7.30 a.m. from Jogeshwari and his auto-riksha which was allegedly used in the commission of the crime was also seized. Accused No.5 Rajendra Bappa Pawar was arrested on 10.11.1997, whereas accused Nos.6 and 7 were arrested by PW-19 Katakdaund from the area of Vakdipidi, Tal.
Kalamb, in Osmanabad District on 13.11.1997 along with accused Nos.8 and 9. Accused Nos.11 and 12 were arrested on 7.12.1997, accused No.10 was arrested on 13.1.1998, accused No.13 was arrested on 17.4.1998 and accused Nos.
14 and 15 were arrested on 17.9.1998 from Vakdipidi, Tal.
Kalamb of Usmanabad District. Initially, the charge-sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 9 and subsequently a supplimentary charge-sheet was filed against accused Nos.10 to 16 as they were arrested belatedly. The case being exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, it was committed ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 8 Appeals595.02+3 and charge at Exh.1 was framed on 23.2.2001.
5. The prosecution examined in all 20 witnesses and claimed PW-1 Vishwanathan Pille as the eye-witness. It relied upon the recoveries of jewellery, household items, iron rods as well as the bloodstained clothes from the person of accused Nos.6 to 9. PW-2 Hasmukh Kataria, PW-5 Vijay Sakhare, PW-7 Fulchand Kesharwani, PW-8 Prabhakar Patil, PW-9 Chandrakant Savant, PW-10 Nagesh Rao, PW-12 Prabhakar Shivgan, PW-13 Shashikant Kadu, PW-14 Ramesh Gaonkar and PW-16 Pramod Patil, were the panch witnesses.
PW-15 Dr.Vithal Vihurkar had conducted the postmortem of the dead body of all the three victims on 4.11.1997 between 3.00 to 6.30 p.m. and had signed postmortem notes at Exh.44 (deceased Anant Kalal), Exh.55 (Ravindra Savant) and at Exh.
46 (Rajendraprasad Dubey). PW-3 Dattatray Thopte, PW-11 Dattatray Dal and PW-19 Bapu Katakdaund, P.W.20 Arun Wable were the police officers.
6. PW-18 Vilas Chitale was the Special Executive Officer who had held the T.I. parade on 2.5.1998 in the premises of Arthur Road Jail and at the instance of the Malad Police Station, and PW-17 Navinchandra Vyas was also the Special Executive Officer who had conducted two different T.I. Parades in the Arthur Road Jail premises at the instance of ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 9 Appeals595.02+3 Malad Police Station. The first T.I. parade was held on 18.12.1997 and the second T.I. parade was held on 9.10.1998. In the T.I. parade held on 18.12.1997, 9 suspects were put in the parade in three different groups (Exhs.52 and 53 respectively). As per PW-18 Vilas Chitale in the T.I. parade held on 2.5.1998, accused No.13 Suresh Shinde was identified by PW-1 Vishwanathan Pille (memorandum Exh.
55).
7. As noted earlier, the prosecution had mainly relied upon the evidence of PW-1 Vishwanathan Pille and PW-6 Chandrabahadur Chudabahadurrao. The Trial Court has not accepted PW-6 as the eye-witness but his evidence to the extent that he saw the gang of 15 to 16 persons duly armed running away from the site of the Pawanbaug Housing Society at about 2.00 a.m. on 4.11.1997, has been accepted.
His claim that he identified some of the accused in the T.I. parade does not inspire confidence and merely by saying that he had seen 15 to 16 persons running away, he was not aware of the incident that had taken place earlier in the compound of Pawanbaug Housing Society. The Trial Court has accepted PW-1 as the eye-witness. However, when this group of appeals was heard on 23.11.2010, the Division Bench in its order noted, ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 10 Appeals595.02+3 "The appellants before us are accused Nos.1, 2 and 11 only. Eye-witnesses are P.W. Nos.1 and 6. Going by the evidence of the said witnesses, prima facie, it is difficult to sustain the finding of guilt against appellants/accused Nos.1, 2 and 11 before us. None of these witnesses have spoken about the involvement of the appellants before us specifically."
8. During the course of the arguments, commenced before us, the learned P.P. fairly conceded that having regard to the entire testimony of PW-1, he could not be relied upon as an eye-witness. PW-1 Vishwanathan Pille who was the occupant of Room No.3 in Bldg.No.9 and whose room was on the ground floor and close to the gate, has stated that Pawanbaug Society has 11 buildings and it is bounded by a common compound wall with only one gate of entrance and exit. At the relevant time, there was only one night watchman on duty (deceased Dubey), but subsequently seven watchmen came to be employed by the Society. As per him, the incident had taken place between 1.00 and 2.00 a.m. on 4.11.1997 when deceased Dubey was the night watchman.
He stated before the Trial Court that in one room he and his wife and in other room of his house his children were sleeping and he heard some disturbances and a voice alarm ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 11 Appeals595.02+3 "bachav, bachav". He was woken up and he saw 15 to 16 miscreants in the Society premises at the entrance gate which is 8 to 10 feet away from his room. He had also seen two persons coming on motor bike and stopped at the gate.
Watchman Dubey had fallen on the ground due to an assault by the miscreants. Two police men were also thrashed by the gang with bamboo sticks and all the three received bleeding injuries. As per this witness, all the three injured were lying at the distance of about six feet from the window of his house. He was shocked to see the incident and was very much scared as the victims were assaulted with bamboo sticks. He also stated that assailants had used bricks for smashing on the head and faces of the victims. Their faces were badly smashed and the incident lasted for about 10 minutes and thereafter the assailants fled and disappeared.
He watched the entire incident from his window and he could see the same in the light posted at the window. It was Diwali time and, therefore, the building premises were illuminated.
His house balcony light was off. Within a short time the police reached the spot. One of the police officers used his telephone to contact the Malad Police Station at about 2.30 a.m. and the mobile police van arrived at the spot. The police visited Flat No.303/304 of the Jain family who had gone out of station. On the next day he had left for his native place in Kerala as per his scheduled visit and returned on 23.11.1997 ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 12 Appeals595.02+3 i.e. after 19 days. He went to the Malad Police Station only after his return from Kerala and his statement was recorded.
He also stated that he regained courage after taking the Darshan of Lord Ayyappa. He was frightened on the fateful night when he could not gather courage to approach the Malad Police Station before he left for Kerala. It was only after he sought the blessings of Lord Ayyappa that he gained courage and went to the Malad Police Station where his statement was recorded. He claimed that in the T.I. parade held on 18.12.1997 he had identified in all six accused (2 from each group, one accused in the T.I. parade held on 2.5.1998 and two accused in the T.I. parade held on 19.10.1998). It is seen that he identified nine accused.
During his substantive evidence before the Trial Court i.e. after a gap of three years, he could identify accused Nos.6, 7 and 14.
He admitted in his cross-examination that he left Mumbai around 11.30 a.m. on 4.11.1998 and immediately after the incident when the police arrived at the scene, he had seen the police preparing panchnama and making enquiries. He left the Society premises to go to his nephew's house at about 2.00 p.m. But he did not go to the police station or tell any one else that he had observed the incident through the window. The explanation provided for the same ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 13 Appeals595.02+3 was that he was scared and shocked and lacked courage. In his cross-examination, he stated that, "I could not see the entire incident and the scene when I peeped through my window because I saw by peeping through not the entire window but slit of curtain. I did not come out till the miscreants left the compound. I could see entrance area which is in straight line of my window. There is a grill balcony in front of my window. I did not disclose my identity when I contacted Malad Police Station on phone, after I failed to contact control Room 100 when the incident was going on. The balcony is 3 feet wide. My shoe rack is kept in the balcony with shoe pairs. All the accused persons were never seen by him earlier. I cannot see without glasses which I am wearing from the age of 16 years. When I got up I could not see without glasses, my spectacle was on a tea-poy, I wore it and saw the incident.........".
He also admitted in his cross-examination that the police were in the compound of the Society and were conducting enquiry till he left his house and he did not tell any one including the police officers that he had seen the incident. In our opinion, having regard to the depositions of this witness, he cannot be relied upon as an eye-witness because his testimony does not inspire confidence. Though the trial Court has stated that the demonair of this witness made it to accept him as an eye-witness, in our view, it would not be safe to accept that PW-1 had actually noticed or seen the participants in the incident. Even if it is presumed that he had seen the incident either before the police arrived at the scene or he had called the police station after the incident had taken place, nevertheless the testimony of this witness ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 14 Appeals595.02+3 does not inspire confidence to accept that he had seen the offenders/assailants.
9. Dr. Vithal Hasha Vihurkar was the Medical Officer attached to the Additional Coroner Court, Juhu in November, 1997. He was appointed as a Medical Officer in the year 1977 and thus had about 20 years of experience. He stated before the trial Court that on 4th November, 1997 he performed 3 postmortem examinations at the instance of the Malad Police Station and one after another. He had conducted the postmortem on the dead body of Anand Arjun Kalal (ADR No.133/97) between 4.30 to 5.30 p.m. He had noticed five ante-mortem injuries on the face, head region and neck which were noted by him in Column 17 of the postmortem report at Exhibit 44. All these injuries were CLW and as per him the same must have been caused by hard and blunt weapons. He noticed fracture of skull giving rise to haematoma and hemorrhage in all compartments. He stated that the said injuries proved to be serious and fatal. As per him the said injuries might have been caused by a single blow on the head and it was sufficient to cause death of the person injured in the ordinary course of nature. He opined that Anand Arjun Kalal died a homicidal death. He had collected blood for forwarding the same to C.A. for grouping Weapon similar to iron rod would cause such type of fracture ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 15 Appeals595.02+3 not only to the head but any part of the body, as per him.
Between 3 to 4 p.m. he had also performed the postmortem on the body of Ravindra Manohar Savant and signed the postmortem note at Exhibit 45. He had noticed six ante-mortem injuries on his head, face and shoulder as recorded in column 17 of postmortem notes. He opined that injury No.2 which was CLW on left side forehead, 4 cm. X 1 and half cm., bone deep was sufficient to cause death. There was skull fracture as mentioned in column No.19 of the postmortem note and it resulted in brain hemorrhage. The cause of death was due to head injury.
He performed the third postmortem on the body of Rajendraprasad Dubay between 5.30 to 6.30 p.m. He noticed six injuries on his head, face and shoulder and those were incised wounds as mentioned in column 17. Injury No.6 was abrasion to right shoulder and all the injuries were ante-
mortem. He further stated that there were three injuries found on head and they were fatal. Corresponding internal injuries in column No.19 were skull fracture and brain haemorrhage due to sharp edged weapon. Injury No.3 was sufficient to cause death of the person. The Doctor further stated that a weapon like iron bar might have been used for the head injury damaging skull bone and resulting into skull ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 16 Appeals595.02+3 fracture. He had signed the postmortem report at Exhibit 46 and as per him the cause of death was hemorrhage and shock due to multiple injuries. As per the doctor all the three deaths had occurred in a common history of assault and happened at the same time. This evidence of the Medical Officer remained intact and proved that all the three victims i.e. Anant Arjun Kalal, Police Constable, Ravindra Manohar Savant and Rajendraprasad Dubay died a homicidal death on account of the injuries they suffered during the same attack and in the night of 3rd November, 1997 (leading to 4th November, 1997).
10. The defence has not seriously disputed that all the three victims died a homicidal death in the wee hours of 4th November, 1997 and while they were on their assigned duty.
It was a brutal attack, obviously, by multiple number of hard and blunt weapons. The attack was so powerful that they died at the spot and in the premises of the Pawanbaug Co-
operative Housing Society. Once we have discarded P.W.1 as the eye witness and disagreed with the opinion of the trial Court in that regard, we are required to examine whether the prosecution has proved its case as against accused Nos.1 to 3 in causing the homicidal death of all the three victims and the robbery/dacoity in Flat No.303/304 of Building No.9 and against accused Nos. 11 and 12 for the offences ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 17 Appeals595.02+3 punishable under Section 412 and 414 of I.P.C., solely on the basis of the circumstantial evidence. In support of its case against the appellants and accused No.3 the prosecution has relied upon the following circumstances:-
(a) The arrest of accused Nos. 1 to 4 by P.W.11 Shri Dattatray Yeshwant Dal, Police Inspector (Law & Order).
(b) Recovery of silver ornaments and utensils like glasses at the instance of accused No.2 - Namdeo Shinde pursuant to the disclosure statement at Exhibit 29-A and seizure panchnama at Exhibit 29-B drawn on 5th November, 1997 between 14.35 to 15.45 hours.
(c) Seizure of silver articles sold by accused No.1 to accused No.12 Shri Mangilal Dave and with the help of accused No.11 Ramesh Jain, as per memorandum of statement at Exhibit 31-A and seizure panchnama at Exhibit 31-B.
(d) Identification of some of the seized articles like silver glasses bearing names of the persons gifted to her daughter on 5th November, 1997 in the morning ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 18 Appeals595.02+3 at the Santacruz Police Station, by PW 4 - Smt. Kirti Jain.
(e) Identification of silver ornaments like panjan, toe rings, bracelets of children, silver tooth pick, silver coins with god's figure at Malad Police Station on 12th November, 1997, by PW 4.
(f) Discovery and seizure of one silver glass at the instance of accused No.3 on 12th November, 1997 and as per the discovery statement at Exhibit 26-A and the seizure panchnama at Exhibit 26-B.
(g) Discovery and seizure of one iron rod and a cloth bundle with a stone on it as well as one key ring with 3 keys and four empty plastic boxes as per the memorandum of disclosure at Exhibit 33-A and seizure panchnama at Exhibit 33-B.
(h) Discovery and seizure of silver ornaments like anklets in large number, silver coins (sikka) with idol impression, silver tooth pick (in all 22 items) from the shop of Amol Jewellers near Santacruz Railway Station on 10th December, 1997 at about 3.00 p.m. as per disclosure memorandum at Exhibit 35-A and ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 19 Appeals595.02+3 seizure panchnama at Exhibit 35-B.
11. Mr. Gole, the learned counsel appearing for accused nos.1 and 2 submitted that there was no arrest panchanama placed on record to show that accused nos.1 to 3 came to be arrested by PW 11 in the wee hours of 5/11/1997 and there is nothing on record to show beyond the words of PW 11 that the said accused were arrested by him. While recording the statement of accused nos.1 and 2 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., this circumstance of their arrest by PW 11 on 5/11/1997 was not put to them, though in question no.23 the depositions of PW 19 - Katakdaund regarding their arrest by Santacruz Police Station on 5/11/1997 was put to them. As per Mr. Gole failure to put this circumstance of their arrest by PW 11 has vitiated the trial and in support of this submission, he relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Asraf Ali vs. State of Assam [2008 (10) Scale 278]. It was also pointed out that there is nothing on record to show that accused nos.1 to 3 were produced before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate for remand on 5/11/1997 or on 6/11/1997. If the arrest of these accused by PW 11 on 5/11/1997 is not proved, the alleged recoveries at their instance and more particularly accused nos.1 to 3 based on the disclosure made by them, while in the custody of the police, have to be discarded. We have examined the record ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 20 Appeals595.02+3 and we found that the submissions of Mr. Gole have force.
The arrest of accused nos.1 to 3 by PW 11 has not been proved as there is no arrest panchanama on record nor any independent witness has been examined in support the arrest made by PW 11 on 5/11/1997. The learned APP could not point out any remand applications suggesting that on 5/11/1997 or on the next day accused nos.1 to 3 were produced before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate for remand. While recording their statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. by the Sessions Court, this circumstance of their arrest by PW 11 was not put to them. In the case of Asraf Ali (Supra), the Supreme Court, after referring to its earlier judgment, observed in para 17 as under:-
"17. At the same time it should be borne in mind that the provision is not intended to nail him to any position, but to comply with the most salutary principle of natural justice enshrined in the maxim audi alteram partem. The word "may" in clause (a) of sub-section (1) in Section 313 of the Code indicates, without any doubt, that even if the court does not put any question under that clause the accused cannot raise any grievance for it. But if the court fails to put the needed question under clause (b) of the sub-section it would result in a handicap to the accused and he can legitimately claim that no evidence, without affording him the opportunity to explain, can be used against him. It is now well settled that a circumstance about ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 21 Appeals595.02+3 which the accused was not asked to explain cannot be used against him."
Hence the circumstance of the arrest by P.W.11 of accused Nos.1 to 3 can not be used against them.
12. P.W.7-Fulchand Asrafilal Kesharwani was the panch witness for the disclosure statement at Exhibit 29A and the seizure panchnama at Exhibit 29B. He stated before the trial Court that on 5th November, 1997 he had attended at the Santacruz Police Station around 1.45 p.m. To act as a panch witness and there was one more panch present with him at the police station. He was shown Namdeo, accused No.2 in the custody of police and the accused wanted to make disclosure regarding certain stolen property. His disclosure statement was recorded (Exhibit 29A) and thereafter in the police vehicle the panch as well as accused No.2 went to Jogeshwari. The accused took the team to one hut and one lady was present in the said hut. She was the wife of accused No.2. The accused went inside the hut, took out a key and he removed a small tin box from beneath the roof. The box was locked. The accused No.2 opened it. The cover of the box was also removed and some silver ornaments and utensils like glasses were seen. The police seized all these articles under the seizure panchnama at Exhibit 29-B. The said hut ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 22 Appeals595.02+3 was along a foot path amidst 10-15 huts. He had signed both the panchnamas after reading the contents therein. As per the panchnama at Exhibit 29-B the following articles were recovered from the house of accused No.2 in the presence of this witness and the panchnama was concluded at 15.45 hours on 5th November, 1997:-
1. Two silver glasses having English writing at the bottom of each glass with date as Sheela weds Rituraj 29/6/86.
2. One pair of silver Anklets each having the length about 26 cms. collectively wt. 25.90 gm. app.
3. One silver bracelet having length 15 cm. & wt.
4.600 gms. app.
4. One silver Anklet having length 19 cms. & wt. 5.900 gms. app.
5. One silver Anklet having length 25 cm. & wt. 9.300 gms. app.
6. One silver Anklet having length 28 cms. & wt. 7.700 gms. app.
7. One silver Anklet having length 21 cms. & wt. 21.5 gms. app.
8. One solid silver bracelet with coloured design on it wt. 5.900 gms. app.
9. One solid silver bracelet with flower design at the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 23 Appeals595.02+3 center wt. 5.500 gms.
10. One silver bangle with wt. 3.400 gm. app.
11. One silver ring of the leg with red stones at the center wt. 3.200 gms.
12. One silver ring of the leg having three small rings with chain wt. 12.300 gm. app.
13. One silver ring of the leg with two red stones and one white wt. 1.200 gms.
14. One silver ring of the leg with red & green stone wt. 1.400 gms. app.
13. P.W.8-Prabhakar Vitthal Patil was another panch witness who was called at the Santacruz Police Station in the afternoon hours to act as a panch witness. He stated before the trial Court that he found one suspect person in the police station. He was in veil and the police officer informed the witness that the accused wanted to make a disclosure.
The veil of the accused was removed and his name was stated to be Sahebrao Gulabrao Kale, accused No.1. He voluntarily stated that he would point out the person to whom he had sold the silver articles in Santacruz area. The statement was recorded and marked at Exhibit 31A. The police party along with the panch witnesses and the accused No.1 went in the jeep in the direction as suggested by the accused and the jeep was stopped in Indira Nagar, Juhu. The ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 24 Appeals595.02+3 accused No.1 pointed out one person at the Milk centre and his name is Mangilal Dave, (accused No.12). The police apprehended him and along with the accused No.1 and accused No.12 the policy party proceeded further towards Santacruz railway station. The accused No.1 and accused No.12 took the police party to one Jewellery shop by name Amol Jewellers near Santacruz railway station and stated that it was the same shop where accused No.1 sold the jewellery. Shri Ramesh Jain, accused No.11 was present in the shop and he admitted that he had purchased the jewellery from accused No.1 and through Mangilal Dave, accused No.12. He also stated that Mangilal was known to him. Accused No.1 produced various silver articles purchased by him and there were some silver glasses with design and marking and a name on it. Some ornaments like silver anklets, zukas, ear tops, etc., were also there. The police seized all these articles and kept in 7 packets and these packets were sealed by drawing panchnama at Exhibit 31B. In his cross examination he stated that he went to the Santacruz police station at 12.45 p.m. and the name of his co-
panch was Raikar. He spent 15 minutes in the police station and thereafter he proceeded with the police party and accused No.11. The articles recovered and listed in the seizure panchanama at Exhibit 31B were as follows:-
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 25Appeals595.02+3 (A) One old silver glass with floral design on one of its side, with star like designs all over. The glass is 10 cms. in height and weighs about 63 gms. - labelled article (A).
(B) One old silver glass with floral design on one side and star like designs all over, about 9.5 cms., tall, with words T-100 at the base and weighing appox. 61 gms.-
labelled article 5.
(C) One pair of baby jingle bells, with whistle at the other end, each with two bells at the base of the dome.
(1) One of the unit is about 8.1 cms., long with number 97 engraved on the whistle. The dome has design on the upper side.
(2) The other unit is about 7.1 cms., long with number T-97, engraved on the whistle. Unlike the design on the first unit, the design on this dome is on the lateral side.
Both the jingle bells collectively weigh about 27 gms., and are labelled article (C) Collectively.
(D) One pair of silver anklets, old, thick and without any beds. The length of each anklet is about 25.5 cms., from one end of the hook to the other. Both the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 26 Appeals595.02+3 anklets have words SK A - 1 engraved near one of the hooks. One anklet has words SK A-1 engraved near the other hook. The second anklet has words ßlsekÞ near the other hook. Both the anklets weighed approx.
58 grms., and were labelled article (D) Collectively.
(E) One pair of old silver anklets, each anklet is about 24 cms., long. Each anklet has two chains. One of the two chains has floral designs on the lower side.
Both these chains are connected to each other by 4 heart shaped plates along the length. Both anklets collectively weigh approx. 21 gms., and are labelled article (E) collectively.
(F) One pair of old, used, silver anklets. One of the anklet has 26 beads along its length, while the other has 25 beads. The anklet with 26 beads has small round plates near both the hooks with words NJ/1 written on them. The other anklet has both such plates near one hook with same words inscribed on them.
Near one of the hooks, both the anklets have 4 beads each attached to the plate having words NJ/1. Both the anklets together weight approx. 46 grms., and are labelled article (F) Collectively.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 27Appeals595.02+3 (G) One single anklet of silver, old and used, with 32 beads attached to the lower end along its length. One end has a round hook, while the other has a "S" shaped hook. Both the hooks have heart shape plates with words SL/1. This anklet weigh about 14 ½ grms., and is labelled article (G)."
14. It is claimed by the prosecution that these articles or some of them were identified by P.W.4-Kirti Lalitkumar Jain as the articles stolen from her flat No.303/304 during the incident and when the family was away from Mumbai. In her evidence she stated that around 4.30 a.m., on 4th November, 1997 while she was at Burhanpur her neighbour Shri Modi from Pawanbaug Housing Society called her and informed about the burglary in her house. The family, therefore, immediately returned to Mumbai by a train (Laskar Express) and reached Mumbai in the night. On arriving at the flat she saw that miscreants had broken open steel Almiras and the articles in the house were seen scattered. She search the missing articles. The police enquired with her about the missing articles. She further stated that only silver ornaments and utensils which were kept at home were found lost and she had given the list of such articles namely ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 28 Appeals595.02+3 glasses, painjan, foot rings, bracelets, children toys, some coins with idol impressions, some wrist watches. As per her the total value of the stolen articles was about Rs.30,000/-
and in addition some clothes were also missing. She further stated that on 5th November, 1997 in the morning she went to the Santacruz police station, identified some recovered silver utensils namely 7/8 silver glasses bearing names of the persons gifted to her daughter. She also stated that during her subsequent visit to Santacruza police station she did not find any of her articles. It is pertinent to note that in the recovery panchnama at Exhibit 29B that there were silver glasses bearing names of the persons gifted to her daughter.
This witness also stated that the articles belonging to her were identified by her only during the morning visit on 5 th November, 1997. Thus the recovery made by recovery panchnama Exhibit 29-B does not co-relate with the articles identified by P.W.4 on 5th November, 1997 at the Santacruz police station in the morning. Not only this even there is no co-relation between the evidence of P.W.4, P.W.11 and P.W. 17 on this issue. P.W.17 stated before the trial Court that P.W.4 visited the Santacruz police station in the evening of 5th November, 1997 and she had arrived at Mumbai in the afternoon on that day. This is contradictory to the evidence of P.W.4. P.W.11 also corroborated the evidence of P.W.17 and stated that P.W.4 visited Santacruz police station in the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 29 Appeals595.02+3 evening on 5th November, 1997.
15. P.W.4-Mrs. Kirti Lalitkumar Jain further stated that after a week from 5th November, 1997 i.e. around 12th November, 1997 she was called to the Malad Police station in connection with the identification of certain recovered articles from the suspects and more particularly the articles like payal, foot rings and coins, etc. She visited the Malad police station on 2-3 occasions and identified some articles.
However, she could not tell the details of the articles she identified and further stated that the identified articles were not more than 40% of the articles she had lost. She further stated that three glasses shown to her before the Court were the same recovered from the Malad police station and four glasses shown to her before the Court were recovered from the Santacruz police station. Thus a total of seven glasses.
PW 4 further stated that she was in the Santacruz Police Station till the noon hours and from many more articles placed before her for identification, she identified only four glasses as the articles stolen from her house.
16. Now let us see whether the articles identified by P.W.4 at the Malad police station were the same which were recovered. P.W.5-Vijay Balram Sakhare is one more panch witness to prove the recovery of one silver glass at the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 30 Appeals595.02+3 instance of accused No.3. He stated before the trial Court that on 12th November, 1997 he was called by the Malad police to act as a panch at about 12.00 noon and one more panch was present there. The police introduced him the person arrested and he was accused No.3. He made voluntary disclosure to show the place where he had kept one silver glass. His statement was recorded at Exhibt 26A. The said accused led the police team along with other witness to his residence at Kalachowki hutment area.
ig The accused pointed out his residence and it was a small hut with no permanent gate and there was one curtain at the entrance.
The police team entered the hut along with the accused and he produced one silver glass in a plastic bag which was seized by the police. Seizure panchnama at Exhibit 26B was drawn. The panch showed recovery of one silver glass weighed 59 gms.
PW 4 in her depositions before the trial court stated that she visited the Malad Police Station after one week from 5/11/1997, so as to identify some of the articles stolen from her house. She further stated that she repeatedly visited the Malad Police Station on 2-3 occasions and she had identified some items like payal, foot rings and coins etc. as the items stolen from her house, in addition to three silver glasses. The prosecution failed to bring on record through the evidence of ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 31 Appeals595.02+3 this witness, whether she identified any of the articles listed in the recovery panchanama at Exh. 31-B and she merely stated that she had identified three glasses at Malad Police Station as her stolen property. If we examine the list of the articles in Exh.31-B, there were two silver glasses with floral designs on one side and star like design all over. PW 4 has not stated that she identified these glasses with such specifications.
17. As per the disclosure statement of accused no.1, the police vehicle had stopped in Indranagar, Juhu at the Milk Centre, where accused nos.12 was present and police had apprehended him. Along with accused no.12, the witness, accused no.1 and the police party went to Santacruz Police Station and accused no.1 and accused no.12 took them to Anmol Jewellers near Santracruz Railway Station. It was a shop run by accused no.11 and he purportedly admitted that he had purchased some jewellery from accused no.1 and at the introduction of accused no.12. They were silver glasses with some design and marking and with specific names.
None of these articles have been identified by PW 4 as her stolen property and which were listed in the seizure panchanama at Exh. 31-B. Accused no.12 has been arraigned as an accused only on the ground that he had introduced accused no.1 to accused no.11 but there is no ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 32 Appeals595.02+3 evidence to show that the articles purportedly seized from the shop of accused no.11 were the stolen property of PW 4.
18. PW 10 - Nagesh Rao stated before the trial court that on 10/12/1997 he attended the Malad Police Station along with one panch who was already present there. The police officer on duty told the panchas that the suspect in the custody of the police named - Ramesh Jain (Accused No.11) had volunteered to give some silver items which were stolen property in the dacoity and received by him. His disclosure statement was recorded at Exh.35-A. They signed the said statement after reading it and along with accused no.11, panchas and police officers went to Anmol Jewellers near Santacruz Railway Stating in police jeep. The shop was opened. Accused No.11 took the party in the shop and from the loft, took out a plastic bag on which the name of Anmol Jewellers has printed. The bag contained silver ornaments like anklets in large numbers and some silver coins with idol impression and some sliver tooth pik. The police prepared the inventory of 22 items and recorded the panchanama of seizure at Exh.35-B. These 22 articles were listed as under:-
1- 144&00 #- pkanhph ygku dMh 6 ,dq.k otu 36 xzWe fd-va-
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 33 Appeals595.02+3 2- 332&00 #- pkanhps 7 iSt.k R;kaps ,dq.k otu 83 xzWe fd-lq- 3- 292&00 #- ik;kr okijko;kps 28 tksMos R;kaps ,dq.k otu 73 xzWe fd-v- 4- 120&00 #- ,d pkanhps nkr dksj.ks otu 3 xzWe- 5- 68&00 #- ,d pkanhps isaMy otu 1 xzWe 700 feyh- fd- v- 6- 588&00 #- pkanhps ikp ik;y ,dq.k otu 147 xzWe fd-v- 7- 552&00 #- nksu pkanhps ik;y otu 138 xzWe 8- 432&00 #- nksu ik;y tksMO;klg pkanhps R;kaps ,dq.k otu 108 xzWe fd-v- 9- 416&00 #- pkanhps vkB ik;y ,dq.k otu 104 xzWe fd-v- 10- 11-
244&00 #- nksu pkanhps gkriku otu 61 xzWe fd-v- 832&00 #- pkanhps 15 ik;y otu 208 xzWe fd-v- 12- 420&00 #- nsokaP;k ygku eksB;k pkanhP;k eqR;kZ ,dq.k otu 105 xzWe fd-v-
13- 328&00 #- pkanhph 1 vkjrh] 1 ygku okVh] 1 ?kksMk] 1 dqadq Mch o 1 Qqynkuh ,dq.k otu 82 xzWe fd-v-
14- 36&00 #- pkanhps 2 okGs ,dq.k otu 9 xzWe fd-v- 15- 260&00 #- pkanhP;k 3 psu o 1 djnksMk otu 65 xzWe fd-
v-
16- 124&00 #- pkanhP;k fdpsu 2 otu 31 xzWe 17- 36&00 #- pkanhP;k 2 tksMoh] nksu vaxB;k] 1 isasMy o 1 czklysV ,dq.k otu 9 xzWe fd-v-
18- 628&00 #- pkanhps 8 flDds ßJhÞ v{kj vlysys ygku eksB;k vkdkjkps otu 157 xzWe fd-v-
19- 412&00 #- pkanhps 2 flDds R;koj x.kirhps fp= o Å¡ v{kj vkgs- ygku o eksBk otu 103 xzWe fd-v- 20- 460&00 #- pkanhps flDds 5 R;koj nsokaph fp=s vkgsr-
ygku eksB;k vkdkjkps ,dq.k otu 115 xzWe fd-v- 21- 180&00 #- pkanhps fcLdhV 3 ,dq.k otu 45 xzWe fd-v- 22- 36&00 #- pkanhpk ykacV iRrk otu 9 xzWe fd-v-
It is pertinent to note that these articles at Exh. 35-B were ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 34 Appeals595.02+3 not identified by PW 4 as any of her stolen articles. Thus, the recovery made at the instance of accused no.1 was also of no consequence to support the prosecution case that the articles stolen from the house of PW 4 in dacoity were sold to accused no.1 at the introduction of accused no.12.
PW 20 - Arun Wable was at the material time attached to the Santacruz Police Station as Police Inspector and he was on night duty on 3/11/1997. On 5/11/1997, he was on duty along with PW 11 - Dal. He stated that accused no.1 had made a voluntary disclosure before he was produced for remand that he would point out some part of stolen booty, which he had sold to one Mangilal Dave (Accused No.12) at Santacruz immediately after commission of crime. The disclosure statement of accused no.1 was recorded at Exh.
31-A. For seizure of the property disclosed by accused no.1, the police party along with the panchas went to Laxmi Dairy where Mangilal Davi (Accused No.12) was present. He identified the seizure panchanama at Exh.31-A. We have already dealt with the same while considering the evidence of panch witness PW 8 - Prabhakar Patil.
19. All the circumstances that were relied upon by the prosecution could not establish that the alleged recoveries of stolen articles were the property of PW 4 and at the same ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 35 Appeals595.02+3 time, any of the articles recovered from the shop of Accused No.11 were the stolen articles belonging to PW 4 and sold to him by accused no.1 with the help of Accused no.12. The chain of circumstances was never complete so as to prove that the articles stolen from the house of PW 4 were recovered at the instance of accused. Thus, there was nothing to connect accused nos. 1 to 3 with the dacoity/robbery allegedly committed at the flat of PW 4 and in the night of 3/11/1997.
ig Similarly, the involvement of accused nos.11 and 12 for having received the stolen property or having assisted the robbers to sell the stolen articles has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and for all these reasons the impugned order of conviction and sentence is unsustainable. The trial court appears to have been overwhelmed by the evidence of PW 1 - Vishwanathan Pille. He was present with the police at the spot and was a witness to the spot panchanama at Exh.20. Surprisingly, he did not disclose to the police at any time before his statement was recorded on 24/11/1997 that he had seen the incident and accused nos.1 to 3 were the assailants in the said incident. He was a got up witness. At the same time, PW 6 -
Chandrabahadur Rauf had no occasion to be an eye witness to the incident and he had not seen accused nos.1 to 3 as the assailants in the said incident. The recovery of iron bar as per the seizure panchnama at Exh.33B at the behest of ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 ::: 36 Appeals595.02+3 accused No.3, read with the C.A. Report at Exh.58/2 has not supported the case of the prosecution.
20. In the premises these appeals succeed. The impugned order of conviction and sentence passed against accused Nos. 1 to 3 is hereby quashed and set aside and accused Nos.
1 to 3 stand acquitted from all the charges. Criminal Appeal Nos.908 and 998 of 2002 are allowed accordingly.
Accused No.11 is hereby acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 412 of I.P.C. and accused No.12 is hereby acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 414 of I.P.C. The impugned order of conviction and sentence passed against them is quashed and set aside. Criminal Appeal Nos.595 of 2002 and 647 of 2002 are allowed accordingly.
The bail bonds of accused Nos. 11 and 12 stand cancelled.
Accused Nos.1 to 3 who are presently undergoing sentence, be released forthwith, unless required to be detained in some other criminal case.
Fine amounts be refunded.
(U.D. SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE,J.)
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:11:27 :::