Case: Vithal Somnath Kore  Vs.  State Of Maharashtra &amp; Others

2. It is rather an unfortunate case of patricide resulting from a dispute relating to property. A detailed narrative of the prosecution case is to be found in the High Court Judgment and it is not necessary for us to repeat the same here. Suffice it to say that there appears to be no love lost between deceased Babu Bapu Vaid and his son, accused No. 1 Ananta, hereafter to be referred as. The other accused Vithal Somnath more was a friend of1 and will be referred to as. It appears that1 was living separately from him father and uncles and he filed a suit for partition of the property against his father. A partition decree was passed and when the occurrence took place an appeal against the decree was pending in the appellate court. On 3rd Feb., 1971 while the deceased was coming towards his village Pethardi and was about three furlongs from his house he was surrounded by the two accused1 and2 poured kerosene oil on deceaseds clothes and1 is said to have lighted deceaseds clothes through a lighted Mashal made of an iron bar. On receiving the burn injuries the deceased shouted, which brought P. Ws. 2 and 6 to the spot. These witnesses ran to the spot on hearing the cries of the deceased and deceased was also running towards his house. Fortunately, the witnesses arrived at the scene in time and at once extinguished the fire, but the accused ran away on seeing them. Some time later Pandurang P.W. 5, a brother of the deceased arrived at the scene of the occurrence and arranged for a cot and took his brother to the dispensary at Kem, where Dr. Doshi gave him first aid. The deceased is said to have made an oral dying declaration to P. Ws. 2 and 6 wherein he implicated the two accused and repeated the same dying declaration before his brother, P.W. 5 also. Dr. Doshi asked the constable to write down a dying declaration made by the deceased of which the questions where put by the Doctor and answered by the deceased. The First written dying declaration, therefore, appears to have been made by the deceased to Dr. Doshi at about 11.00 p.m. Thereafter, Pandurang lodged F.I.R. at the Police Station which brought the Investigating Officer to the spot and after the usual investigation the accused were challenged but ultimately acquitted by the Sessions Judge as indicated above. The accused pleaded innocence and the defence of1 was that his father was a man of loose character and had outraged the modesty of a woman a few years ago and had even cast an evil eye on his, (wife of) and suggested that he may have been assaulted by some of his enemies. The Sessions Judge found that the evidence against the accused was not satisfactory and the case was not proved and he accordingly acquitted the accused. The State filed an appeal of the High Court against the order of acquittal, in which the High Court reversed the judgment of the Sessions Judge and convicted the appellants under S. 302/34 and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. Hence this appeal before us

Court's reasoning:
5. We fully agree with the High Court that there was no good reason to distrust the evidence of P. Ws. 2 and 6. We have perused their evidence and we think they have deposed in a straightforward manner and their evidence contains a ring of truth. Thus the evidence of these witnesses is sufficient to convict the appellants for the offence of murder. But the evidence of eyewitnesses was further corroborated by the oral dying declarations said to have been made by the deceased to P. Ws. 2 and 6 and also to his brother. P.W. 5 which finds place in F.I.R. also7. Having, therefore, considered the evidence of theeyewitnessesand the evidence furnished by the dying declarations we are satisfied that the High Court was right in reaching the conclusion that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. This was not a case where another view was reasonably possible. The order of the Sessions Judge was based on pure speculation and was manifestly wrong and was rightly set aside by the High Court7. Having, therefore, considered the evidence of theeyewitnessesand the evidence furnished by the dying declarations we are satisfied that the High Court was right in reaching the conclusion that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. This was not a case where another view was reasonably possible. The order of the Sessions Judge was based on pure speculation and was manifestly wrong and was rightly set aside by the HighCourt.8. We would like to mentioned here that in the first instance2 had filed the appeal before the Supreme Court but later we directed learned counsel appearing amicus curiae to move1 also to file an appeal to this Court if he so desires. And, therefore,1 also filed an appeal which has been registered as a separate appeal. Mr. Ganpule, counsel for the appellants states that Superintendent of Jail had written to him that he was entitled to Rs. 250/for drafting the petition of appeal from Jail. This is indeed a most extraordinary conduct on the part of Superintendent of Jail. We do not understand under what law he can make such a demand. We, however, do not wish to say anything more on this aspect as the learned counsel appearing for the State has assured us that he will take up this matter with the Government.