1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Appeal No.865 of 2008 (State of Maharashtra v. Baban Pandurang Chandekar) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri S.B. Ahirkar, APP for Appellant. CORAM : A.H. Joshi & R.C. Chavan, JJ. DATE : 6th March, 2009 1. Entire case is based on evidence of fact of last seen. 2. The witness whose testimony is relied upon to prove the fact of last seen is PW 11 Dhanraj. 3. Thus the PW 11 does not give any details as to the fact of last seen barring a statement. His statement in the examination-in-chief reads as follows : “I know the accused present before the Court. Incident occurred before a year ago. About 15 days before the incident I had gone to Wakdi. My brother-in-law was residing there. At Wakdi I saw Baban and Chayya near the Gionning Factory. It was the time of 4.00 p.m. I talked to Baban there where he has come. Then he told me that he had come for 2 roaming and thereafter where he had gone I do not know.” 4. The learned Trial Judge, therefore, rightly held in para 52 that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused. The evidence brought by the prosecution is full of suspicion and does not inspire confidence. 5. In these premises, no interference is called for in the order of acquittal. 6. The appeal is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE pdl