Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

b. That the key bunch was lying in his room which he threw down. With that, PW1 opened the front door but could not open the main door as it was latched from inside. He broke open the door by a toy of Sahitya and came out and opened the main door. Thereafter, himself, PW1-Hemant and PW12-Savita all three of them together went to the bedroom of Reena and found her fallen dead in blood.

c. PW12 has further stated that Police came there alongwith dog squad and finger prints examiners who first inspected the dead body of Reena and thereafter the dead bodies of Aditya and Sahitya. At that time, himself, PW1, his wife Khyati-CW13, Harish-CW14 and Tejal-CW15 were present. Police collected sample blood. Police inspector conducted inquest of dead body of Reena, PSI conducted inquest of dead body of Aditya and ASI conducted inquest of dead body of Sahitya. PW2-Vinod, CW3-Vikram, CW7-

- 32 -

13.8 Dog squad:

a. PW17 is Maharudra Jagadish Elameli has in his evidence stated that on 16.08.*2017 on receipt of call from the control room, he went to the spot of the incident and on inspection, the dog went through the staircase to the terrace and inside a bamboo room and thereafter went up to the parapet wall and stood there and report in this regard is as per Ex.P52.
b. In the cross-examination, the said witness has admitted that once the dog catches the smell, it will follow the suspect wherever he has gone till the last point. The dog in this case stood only near the parapet wall. That he did not take the dog to a house situated next below the house of the incident. He also admits that if a person jumps over to another house, the smell would continue and the dog would follow, but he did not take the dog beyond the parapet wall.

Regarding Dog Squad:

18.13 Referring to the investigation through the dog squad, PW24-the Investigation Officer has stated that the dogs after running around inside the house went to the terrace and stood near the pole where the pipe had been tied and they did not give instruction to the dog to go further. That the said dog did not go towards the house of the accused or downwards. That they did not take the dog to the neighbouring houses. That though in the mahazar at Ex.P3, there is a mention that a plastic pipe measuring 14' which was tied to a steel pole, was in the east to west direction with blood stains thereon, they did not take any steps to use the dog squad to find out about blood stains or to identify anyone.

- 64 -

18.14 The deposition of PW24, a serious questions would arise with regard to the very presence of the dog squad at the place of incident. Though several photographs have been taken and presented by the prosecution, apparently taken while drawing the mahazar at Ex.P3, none of the photographs depict presence of any dog squad. The inaction/inability on the part of the PW17 and PW24 in pursuing the investigation with the help of the so called dog squad, brings cloud on the theory of use of the dog squad to detect the crime and the accused. In other words, the dog squad has been rendered useless in the instant case merely on account of inaction and inability of the investigation team.