drp {1} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.537 OF 2009 Javed Khan s/o Salam Khan Pathan APPELLANT Age-44 years, Occ-Labour R/o H.No.1-9-55, Behind Hotel Samidh, University Gate, Aurangabad VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Through Police Inspector, Begumpura Police Station Aurangabad. ....... Mr.A.B.Gaikwad, Advocate for the appellant (appointed) Mrs.R.K.Ladda, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE : 8 th February 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER A.V.POTDAR, J.): 1. By the present criminal appeal, the appellant has questioned his conviction u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in drp {2} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 default to suffer further RI for one year, in Sessions Case No. 247/2006 by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-4 Aurangabad vide judgment and order dated 03.11.2007. 2. Prosecution version, as unfolded during the trial, is as follows- a) On 14.08.2006, PSI Kadri, attached to Begumpura police station, Aurangabad had registered Crime No.85/2006 for an offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, on the basis of complaint lodged by Alakkhan (PW-5). Investigation of the said crime was entrusted to PI Mahanwar (PW-7), who, on the basis of secret information, had visited the spot near Milind College Hostel and had seized one knife stained with blood, sample of plain soil and blood mixed soil from the spot. Thereafter, Spot Panchanama (Exhibit-16) was drawn in presence of Panch witnesses. Thereafter PI Mahanwar visited a spot, near a Riksha stand at Burhani colony, shown by PW-5 Alakkhan. Another spot Panchanama (Exhibit-15) was drawn. From there also plain soil and blood mixed soil was collected. Thereafter, inquest Panchanama (Exhibit-36) was drawn on the dead body of Fauziabegum. b) After drawing of the Inquest Panchanama, Dr.Sharad Kuchewar conducted post mortem on the dead body on 14.08.2006. During the Postmortem, the following injuries drp {3} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 were noticed on the person of deceased Fauziyabegum. 1. Deep incised wound over front and lateral aspect of neck on thyroid cartilage, transverse horizontal with three tailing on right side of neck directed from left to right. Size 12 X 6 cm X soft issue deep with partial transaction of fractical rings in three sites lying one below another separately by 0.5 cm and 0.8 cm respectively through which fine and coarse frothy reddish froth oozes out. Left jugular and carotid shows complete transaction. Cut edges of soft tissue blood stained partly dried, reddish. 2. Incised wound over right side of neck situated 3 ½ cm below right mastoid, obligately placed. Edges sharp, clear cut and reddish size 2 X 1 cm x skin deep. 3. Bevelled incised wound over left palm web beth index and thumb more on index size 8 x 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm – edges sharp and clean cut, reddish. 4. Sharp wounds-three in numbers-situated over front of abdomen, two of which above the umbilicus and one below over left side. 5. Stabs – a)8 cm above umbilicus left to mid line obliquely placed size 2.2 x 1 cm soft tissue deep, directed left to right. b) 6 cm above umbilicus on right side vertically placed – size drp {4} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 2.2 cm x 1 cm cavity deep, directed inwards, medially and downwards. c) 5 cm below umbilicus on left side obliquely placed – size 2.2 x 1 cm soft tissue deep directed left to right in the soft tissue. All the stabs edges are sharp, clean cut, one angle acute and other blunt, acute angles of injury (a) and (b) are towards umbilicus and (c) towards mid line. 6. Incised wound over front of right knee vertically placed – size 2.1 cm margins clean cut, reddish. Accordingly, Postmortem report (Exhibit-21) was prepared. According to the Medical Officer, the cause of death was cut throat (homicidal) associated with multiple stabs over abdomen. The Medical officer has opined that the said injuries, taken together, are sufficient, in ordinary course, to cause death. It was also opined that the said injuries are possible due to knife, like Article 1. c) The appellant was also admitted in Ghati Hospital. PW-2 had also collected the blood sample of the appellant and had forwarded the same along with the blood sample of the deceased, for determination of blood group. d) Clothes of the deceased were seized under Panchanama (Exhibit-17). Statement of PW-6 Nasiruddin and others were recorded by the investigating officer. On drp {5} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 15.08.2006 clothes of the complainant were seized under Panchanama (Exhibit-18). Statements of PW-4 Jibrankah and PW-3 Ayeshabegum, children of appellant and deceased were recorded. On 16.08.2006 statements of some more witnesses were corded. Statements of PW-3 to 5 were recorded u/s 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code by JMFC, Aurangabad. During the further investigation, the seized property was sent to CA along with covering letters Exhibit-43 and 46. The appellant was put under arrest on 13.10.2006. After receipt of the CA reports and on completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed before JMFC, Aurangabad. e) After committal of the trail to the Court of Sessions, the trial court framed charge against the appellant at Exhibit-4 for an offence punishable u/s 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code to which the appellant pleaded not guilty. Prosecution, to prove the charges leveled against the appellant, has examined in all 7 witnesses. The trial court, on appreciation of the evidence of the eye witnesses and medical evidence coupled with the circumstantial evidence, convicted the appellant for an offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, however acquitted him of the offence punishable u/s 309 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. For better appreciation of the rival submissions drp {6} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 advanced across the bar it is necessary to advert to the evidence of material witnesses examined by the prosecution. 4. It is in the evidence of PW-5 Alakkhan that deceased Fauziyabegum was his mother and the appellant is his father. They all were residing in a house situated in Jaisingpura at Aurangabad along with PW-3 Jibrankhan and PW-4 Ayeshabegum, his brother and sister, respectively. The appellant and grand father of this witness were suspecting the character of his mother (deceased). Due to the said suspicion, there used to be frequent quarrels between the deceased and the appellant. His father frequently used to assault his mother (deceased). He has stated that whenever the appellant used to go out, he used to confine all of them in a room by latching the door from outside. The appellant used to beat them mercilessly. They all were fed up with the attitude of the appellant and, therefore, all of them had decided to leave the house. One month prior to the incident, they all had left the house of the appellant. Prior to the incident they were residing in a rented premises situated in Asefiya colony. 5. In respect of the incident, PW-5 has stated that on 13.08.2006, he along with his mother (deceased) and PW-4 brother and PW-3 sister had been to the house of their maternal aunt, Vajeda. While they were returning around 11.00 p.m. and when they reached near Burhani colony, appellant came there and after exchange of heated arguments all of a sudden the appellant took drp {7} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 out knife and gave repeated blows of the knife on the person of his mother and also on her throat. When they raised alarm, the appellant fled away from the spot. Thereafter he informed his aunt Vajeda about the incident. PW-6 Nasir, husband of his aunt informed the police. Thereafter they took Fauziyabegum to Ghati hospital, where she was declared to be dead. Police recorded his complaint at Exhibit-35. During the investigation his blood stained clothes were seized by the police, which he identified in the Court so also the clothes of the deceased and the knife by which the appellant had assaulted his mother (deceased). 6. It is reflected from the cross examination of PW-5, that the behaviour of the appellant is rude and like a dictator. The appellant used to behave normal when all was going according to his whims otherwise he used to get angry. Relations between the appellant with his maternal aunt and her family members were not cordial. Due to the rude behaviour of the appellant, he and other family members left the house of the appellant about a month prior to the incident while the appellant was sleeping, by latching the door from outside. On the day of the incident when the appellant intercepted them the appellant had first requested to return back to his house to which they had declined. Thereafter, the appellant inflicted repeated knife blows on Fauziyabegum. 7. On perusal of the cross examination of this witness it is clear that the appellant had not disputed his presence and his drp {8} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 acts alleged by PW-5. 8. Evidence of PW-4 Jibrankhan, another son of appellant and deceased, is on the similar lines of the evidence of PW-5. However, additionally, he has given the detailed particulars of the assault by the appellant on Fauziyabegum. Omissions are tried to prove in his cross examination that he has not stated in the statement recorded u/s 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, that “the appellant pulled clad of the deceased, gave repeated knife blows to the deceased, the appellant put his legs on the hands of the deceased and had cut her throat”. Still fact remains that the evidence of this witness in respect of assault by the appellant on the deceased remained unshattered. He has specifically stated that the appellant assaulted his mother (deceased) with knife on throat and body. According to us the evidence of this witness in respect of the incident of assault on the deceased by the appellant is not shattered at all in his cross examination. 9. Evidence of PW-3, Ayeshabegum, daughter of appellant and deceased, is also on the similar lines of the evidence of PW-4 and PW-5. She has also given full and minute details of the assault by the appellant on her mother. She identified the clothes of the deceased, clothes of the complainant as well as weapon of assault, before the Court. During the marathon cross examination, baring some stray admissions, her evidence in respect of assault by the appellant on her mother (deceased) remained un-shattered. drp {9} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 10. Evidence of PW-3 to 5 is also corroborated by the evidence of PW-6 Nasir. He has stated that immediately after the assault, PW-3 to 5 reported the incident to him, who in turn reported the same to the police and later on reached at Ghati hospital where the deceased was taken. 11. In this background, heard learned counsel appointed on behalf of the appellant followed by the submissions of learned APP. 12. From perusal of the evidence of PW-2 Dr.Kuchewar, there is no doubt in our mind that death of Fauziyabegum is a homicidal one. 13. Evidence of PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5 establishes that due to the tyranny and rude behaviour of the appellant towards the deceased and themselves, they had left his house. The evidence of these three eye witnesses in respect of assault by the appellant on their mother, is consistent with each other and not at all shattered even in their respective cross examinations. Therefore, it can safely be inferred that the evidence of the three eye witnesses is reliable evidence in respect of assault by the appellant on Fauziayabegum, which resulted into her death. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the evidence of these three eye witnesses. drp {10} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 14. Learned counsel for the appellant tried to urge that though the investigating officer has admitted in his evidence that the appellant had also sustained injuries and he was admitted in Ghati hospital for treatment, yet as the prosecution failed to explain the said injuries, the same is vitally affected the case of the prosecution. Learned counsel for the appellant, in support of his contention, has placed reliance on the observations of the Apex Court in the matter of “Raj Pal & Another V/s State of Haryana” 2007 Cri.L.J. 2926 and urged that as the prosecution failed to explain the injuries found on the person of the appellant-accused, the case of the prosecution became doubtful and therefore, benefit of doubt be given to the appellant-accused. We afraid to accept these submissions for the simple reason that no case is made out in the cross examination of the eye witnesses that during the incident there was scuffle between the eye witnesses or others with the appellant and in that scuffle he had sustained the injuries. In absence of anything brought on record indicating that at the time of the incident scuffle had taken place and in the said scuffle the appellant had sustained injuries, according to us, it is not necessary for the prosecution to explain the injuries found on the person of the appellant. Though the trial court has acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 309 of the Indian Penal Code, yet the Investigating Officer has deposed that he had received secret information that after the incident in question the appellant had attempted to commit suicide and hence injuries are found on the person of the appellant. It is also urged by learned drp {11} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 counsel for the appellant that the case of the appellant does not fall within the scope of section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, however the case of the appellant is squarely covered u/s 304 Part- I or II of the Indian Penal Code. According to him in answer to question No.46 in the statement u/s 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, defence is taken by the appellant that the deceased had illicit relations with PW-6 Nasir and he was instigating the deceased to reside separately from the appellant and compelled the sons of the appellant to work as a labours. Further defence is taken that on the day of the incident the appellant had been to the house of Shaikh Nasir to persuade his sons, at that time he had seen the deceased in compromising position with PW-6 and hence he took out a quarrel with him, who had assaulted the appellant and in the said scuffle Fauziyabegum had sustained injuries and PW-6 had thrown the appellant near law college and prepared false case against him. The appellant had further asserted that his children are under the thumb of PW-6 Shaikh Nasir and therefore gave false evidence against the appellant. We afraid to accept this defence of the appellant on the ground that no such case was put forth in the cross examination of PW-6 or in the cross examinations of the three eye witnesses. On the contrary, we are of the view that the three eye witnesses as well as the deceased were fed up with the tyranny and rude attitude of the appellant towards them, which forced them to leave his house and take shelter elsewhere. Therefore, according to us, this is a false defence taken by the appellant and cannot be accepted. drp {12} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 15. Apart from the ocular evidence of PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5 coupled with the medical evidence which speaks that the death of Faiziyabegum is a homicidal, there are circumstances by way of CA reports, which also support the case of the prosecution. The CA reports are at Exhibit-22, 23 and 24. CA report at Exhibit-22 indicates that the blood of the deceased was of “A” group. CA report Exhibit-24 indicates that the blood of the appellant is of “B” group and CA report Exhibit-23 indicates that the blood found on the clothes of the decased and the appellant is of “A” group i.e. the blood of the deceased. The blood found on the knife was of “A” and “B” groups. Appellant has nowhere explained as to how the blood of the blood group of the deceased was found not only on his clothes but also on the weapon used by him. Thus, the report of the CA also corroborates the oral testimony of the three eye witnesses-PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5. Though in the cross examination of PW-6 suggestion was given to him that he had assaulted the deceased, yet it appears that the defene of sudden provision is taken, which is not established. Considering the overall re-appreciation of the evidence we are of the considered view that the prosecution has proved the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt. 16. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the trial court has rightly convicted the appellant for an drp {13} Cri. Appeal No.537/2009 offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which requires no interference by this Court. In the premise the appeal ought to fail. 17. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed, being sans merit. We quantify the fees payable to the learned counsel appointed on behalf of the appellant at Rs.5000/- [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/A11/criapel537-09