JISHAN @ ISHAN HAMAJA ALI KURESHI vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Case type
- Interim Application
- Decided on
- 13-02-2026
2026:BHC-AS:9934-DB
: 1 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
[1] CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1165 OF 2023
Rahul Ravindra Barai …..Appellant
[Orig.Accused No.1]
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & another .….Respondents
…..
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3504 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1165 OF 2023
[2] CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.976 OF 2023
Jishan @ Ishan Hamaja Ali Kureshi …..Appellant
[Orig.Accused No.2]
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & another .….Respondents
…...
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3191 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.976 OF 2023
…..
WITH
[3] CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.976 OF 2024
Santosh Vishnu Jugdar …..Appellant
[Orig.Accused No.3]
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & another .….Respondents
…….
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4960 OF 2024
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.976 OF 2024
1 of 76
Deshmane(PS)
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:03 :::
: 2 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
-----
Mr. Sachin Deokar, Advocate for the Appellant in Apeal/1165/2023.
Ms. Vrushali Maindad, Advocate for the Appellant in Apeal/976/2023.
Mr. Aniket Vagal, Advocate for the Appellant in Apeal/976/2024.
Ms. Kranti Hiwrale, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Jugal Kanani, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in Apeal/1165/2023 & for
the Applicant in IA/3504/2023.
Mr. Advait Tamhankar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 in Apeal
Nos.976/2023 & 976/2024 and for the Applicant in I.A. Nos.3191/2023 &
4960/2024.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
th th
DATE : 12 & 13 FEBRUARY, 2026
JUDGMENT : [PER SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.]
1.
All these three Appeals are decided by this common
judgment because they arise out of the same impugned judgment
and order dated 26.5.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge
under POCSO Act & Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Special
Case Child Prot. No.246/2014. For convenience, the Appellants are
referred to by their original status as the accused in the trial.
2.
Criminal Appeal No.1165/2023 is preferred by the
original accused No.1 Rahul Barai, Criminal Appeal No.976/2023 is
preferred by the original accused No.2 Jishan Kureshi and Criminal
Appeal No.976/2024 is preferred by the original accused No.3
Santosh Jugdar.
2 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:03 :::
: 3 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
3.
The learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced all of
them for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 363
read with 120-B, 366-A read with 120-B, 376-D read with 120-B,
302 read with 120-B, 201 read with 120-B of Indian Penal Code
and under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children From
Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’). They were
sentenced as follows :
i.
For commission of the offence punishable under Section 363
read with 120-B of IPC, they were sentenced to suffer RI for
three years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in
default of payment of fine to suffer RI for six months each;
ii. For commission of the offence punishable under Section 366-
A read with 120-B of IPC, they were sentenced to suffer RI
for five years each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in
default of payment of fine to suffer RI for six months each;
iii. For commission of the offence punishable under Section 376-
D read with 120-B of IPC, they were sentenced to suffer life
imprisonment for the remainder of their natural life and to
pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of
fine to suffer RI for six months each;
3 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 4 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
iv.
For commission of the offence punishable under Section 302
read with 120-B of IPC, they were sentenced to suffer life
imprisonment for the remainder of their natural life and to
pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of
fine to suffer RI for six months each;
v. For commission of the offence punishable under Section 201
read with 120-B of IPC, they were sentenced to suffer RI for
three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in
default of payment of fine to suffer RI for six months each;
. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
They were given set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. for the
punishment under Sections 363, 366-A and 201 of IPC.
4.
There was one more accused i.e. accused No.4
Shivkumar Thathera, who was acquitted of all the charges.
5.
Heard Mr. Sachin Deokar, learned counsel for the
Appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1165/2023, Ms. Vrushali
Maindad, learned counsel for the Appellant in Criminal Appeal
No.976/2023, Mr. Aniket Vagal, learned counsel for the Appellant
in Criminal Appeal No.976/2024, Ms. Kranti Hiwrale, learned APP
for the Respondent-State in all Appeals, Mr. Jugal Kanani, learned
4 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 5 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
counsel for the Respondent No.2 in Criminal Appeal No.1165/2023
& for the Applicant in Interim Application No.3504/2023, Mr.
Advait Tamhankar, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 in
Criminal Appeal Nos.976/2023 & 976/2024 and for the Applicant
in Interim Application Nos.3191/2023 & 4960/2024.
6.
The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows:
. The victim was sixteen years of age. She was residing at
Wadala with her family. The accused No.3 Santosh induced her to
stay with him and kept her in a flat in Nalasopara. It was taken on
leave and license basis in the name of the accused No.1 Rahul’s
friend. From around 22.4.2014, the victim “R’ was kept in that flat.
All the accused committed rape on her repeatedly. She was insisting
that the accused No.3 Santosh takes some steps in taking their
relationship forward. He was already married. He wanted to send
her to Uttar Pradesh. She was not willing to go there. She tried to
find an escape route. She developed close friendship with a person
from the locality in Nalasopara. She was not allowed to contact
others. Her mobile phone was broken by the accused. Her friend
at Nalasopara gave one SIM card to her. She used to secretly
th th
contact him by using that SIM card. In the night of 6 and 7
5 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 6 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
May, 2014 the accused No.1 Rahul and the accused No.2 Jishan
committed her murder by strangulating her with her odhani. They
kept her dead body in a trolly bag. They carried that dead body in
the bag from Nalasopara to Dadar in the early hours of 7.5.2014.
They reached Dadar at around 4.30 a.m. where the accused No.3
was waiting for them. He arranged a taxi to take them to Pune.
They went to Pune. They left the taxi. Then they hired an
autorickshaw and went to Talegaon railway station. They left the
bag at the railway station. They went towards Urse toll plaza. They
took a lift from a private vehicle by paying some money to the
driver and came back to Mumbai. Both the accused Nos.1 & 2 then
met the original accused No.3 Santosh. They went to a restaurant
and bar for some time in the afternoon. Then they returned to their
respective houses. Till that time it was almost a foolproof plan
where it would have been difficult to trace the identity of the dead
body. The abandoned bag was seen by someone. The police were
informed. The dead body was removed from the bag and was sent
for postmortem examination. The crime was difficult to detect but
the accused committed one mistake. They had not checked the
clothes worn by the deceased. She had concealed the SIM card
6 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 7 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
given by her friend, in her underwear. The police recovered that
SIM card. Her friend was constantly trying to get in touch with her
through that SIM card. The police found that there was repeated
communication with a particular phone number. They dialed that
phone number. It was found to be the phone number of the friend
of the deceased. The police went to Nalasopara and met him. From
that point onwards the police collected evidence and solved the
crime. That friend of “R” told them how she was kept in that flat by
these three accused and how she was sexually exploited. The police
kept watch on that particular flat. The accused Nos.1 & 2 unaware
of this breakthrough by the investigating agency went to that flat.
The police trapped them. They were arrested. They gave
information about the accused No.3 Santosh. The police went to his
house and arrested him as well. At the time of arresting all the
accused, their mobile phones were seized. Based on their mobile
phone numbers, travel of the accused Nos.1 & 2 from Pune to
Mumbai and back was confirmed. During their further
investigation, the taxi driver who had taken them from Mumbai to
Pune and another driver who had taken them from Urse to Mumbai
were traced. In the meantime, the accused No.1 Rahul gave a
7 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 8 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
memorandum statement, pursuant to which two pieces of nylon
rope and a knife were recovered from his flat. A thorough search
was conducted of the flat. More than 40 passbooks and many ATM
cards in the name of the accused No.1 were found in that flat. They
were seized. The statements of various witnesses were recorded.
The postmortem notes revealed that the deceased was sexually
assaulted. The cause of death was strangulation due to odhani. The
nylon rope tied to the body and the two pieces of rope found from
the accused No.1 Rahul’s flat were sent for chemical analysis. All
the three pieces matched with each other. Test identification parade
was conducted and some of the witnesses identified the accused.
After the investigation was completed, the charge-sheet was filed
and the case was committed to the Court of Session and since it
was an offence under POCSO Act it was tried by the learned
Special Judge under POCSO Act.
7.
During the trial, the prosecution examined 28 witnesses
in the form of taxi driver, the other driver, father of the deceased, a
friend of the deceased from Wadala, a friend of the deceased from
Nalasopara who used to help the deceased, the medical officer, the
Tahsildar who had conducted the test identification parade, the
8 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 9 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
panchas for various panchnamas and the investigating officers.
8.
The defence of the accused was of total denial. In
addition, they tendered a written statement under Section 313 of
Cr.P.C.. According to the accused No.1 Rahul he was residing at
Koliwada, Antop Hill, Wadala. He did not know the deceased or her
father. He did not meet the accused No.2 or the accused No.3 and
he had not resided anytime in the flat at Nalasopara. He had not
called the other accused telephonically or had not sent any message
to them. He had not paid them any money. He had not given any
statement and nothing was recovered at his instance. The police
did not have any document supporting the recovery panchnama.
He was falsely implicated. The witnesses were giving false evidence
against him and that he was never subjected to the test
identification parade.
9.
The accused No.2 Jishan also gave a written statement
under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.. He also stated that he did not know
the deceased, her father or her friend. He had never met the other
accused. He had no connection with the flat at Nalasopara. He had
not met anybody in Nalasopara in particular, connected with this
case. He had never contacted or sent messages to the accused. He
9 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 10 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
had never given any money to the other accused. The police have
falsely implicated him.
10.
The accused No.3 Santosh also gave his written
statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.. According to him, he was
residing at Himmat Nagar, Wadala (East), Mumbai. He was never
residing at Santana Chawl, Wadala, Mumbai. He was not knowing
either the deceased or her father or her friends. He had not met
any of the accused earlier. He had no connection with the
concerned flat at Nalasopara. He had not met the friend of the
deceased at Nalasopara. He had never contacted or sent messages
telephonically to the other accused. The police had falsely involved
him in this case.
11.
The prosecution case has unfolded through the
evidence of some of the police officers. It would be convenient to
refer to their evidence before referring to other witnesses.
12.
PW-1 PSI Sarjerao Shinde was the first informant. He
deposed that in May 2014 he was attached to Pune Railway Police
Station as a PSI. On 7.5.2014, he was on duty as PSO. His duty
hours were from 9.00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m.. He received a phone call
at 11.10 a.m. from Talegaon Railway Station Police Chowky that
10 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 11 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
one red coloured trolly bag was lying abandoned at Talegaon
Railway Station and that there was a dead body in that bag. The
dead body was of a girl of around 15-17 years of age. The dead
body was tied with a nylon rope. PW-1 reported this phone call to
his senior and on his instructions went to Talegaon Railway
Station. He reached there at around 12.00 noon, went to platform
No.2 and saw that bag near the public toilet. PI Parmar was with
him. He removed the chain slightly to look inside. The information
received by PW-1 was confirmed. There was a dead body tied with
yellow nylon rope. There was a white handkerchief tied to her
mouth. There was salwar, top and odhani on the dead body. Two
pancha witnesses, including one lady pancha, were called. The
panchnama was conducted at the spot. The bag was shifted to
railway hospital near Pune Railway Station. The dead body was
taken out from the bag in the presence of panchas at the hospital.
Inquest panchnama was prepared. Significantly, the police
recovered one SIM card of Docomo company and a black button
from inside her underwear. There was bleeding from her nose and
ear. The dead body was sent to Sassoon Hospital for postmortem
examination. On receipt of the postmortem notes, the FIR was
11 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 12 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
lodged as C.R. No.95/2014 at the police station by this witness. It
is produced on record at Exhibit-90. The bag was produced in the
Court at Article No.1. The white handkerchief was produced at
Article No.6 and the yellow nylon rope was produced at Article
No.7 before the Court. He identified the photographs taken at the
spot. They were produced on record.
In the cross-examination, he deposed that his police
station was at a distance of 25 to 30 kms from Talegaon Railway
Station. When he reached there, a crowd had already gathered
near that bag. They were present at Talegaon Railway Station for
about 4 to 5 hours. He denied the suggestion that the SIM card and
the button were not found. The FIR produced at Exhibit-90
corroborates his evidence. There is hardly any effective cross-
examination and serious challenge to the fact that the trolly bag
with the dead body was found at Talegaon Railway Station.
13.
PW-26 PI Ramdas Shelke was working as API in
Railway Police, Pune (LCB) in May 2014. They had conducted
parallel investigation of the crime. He was instructed by Senior
Police Inspector More to go to Talegaon Railway Station where the
bag was found on platform No.2. He went there. He met PW-1 and
12 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 13 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
his team. PW-26 deposed about finding of the dead body and the
SIM card. PW-26 noted down the twenty digit number on the SIM
card and returned it back to PW-1’s team and in particular to PI
Parmar. From that twenty digit number with the help of technician
Police Constable Dhole (PW-14) he traced the CDR & SDR from
Docomo company as the SIM card was of that company. From the
SDR they came to know that said number was of one Tiwari who
was a resident of Nalasopara and there were maximum calls from
Tiwari’s phone number. Therefore, PW-26 and his team went to
Nalasopara in search of Tiwari on 8.5.2014. With the help of local
police they called Tiwari at Nalasopara police station. PW-26
showed him a photograph of the deceased. Tiwari (PW-25)
identified that photo and told them that it was the photograph of
“R”. She was residing at Nalasopara in New Home Classic Building.
He gave information that the accused Nos.1 & 2 were residing with
her and the accused No.3 Santosh used to visit that flat. Said
Tiwari had given a SIM card to her. On the basis of this
information, PW-26 and his team including PI More laid a trap at
that particular flat. As per the description given to them they saw
the accused Nos.1 & 2 coming towards the building. They were
13 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 14 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
apprehended. They were taken in custody. On enquiry, they gave
information about the accused No.3 Santosh who was at Wadala on
that day. PW-26 and his team took custody of the accused No.3
with the help of officers of Antop Hill Police Station. All three of
them were arrested. On 10.5.2014, the accused No.1 Rahul gave a
memorandum statement expressing his willingness to show one
black bag kept in his flat in which he had concealed the cash
amount received by him, the mobile phone of “R”, yellow nylon
rope and the knife. His memorandum statement was recorded in
presence of the panchas. His memorandum statement was
produced on record at Exhibit-134. As per his information, he led
the police and the panchas to his flat at Nalasopara. He took them
th
to Flat No.704 on the 7 floor at New Home Classic Building. The
keys were with one Mishra who was residing on the fourth floor.
He was called. The flat was opened. The accused No.1 climbed on
the kitchen otta and took out a bag concealed near the water tank
of the bathroom. When it was opened, there was cash of
Rs.62,200/-, one mobile handset of Max Company having two SIM
cards, two pieces of yellow nylon rope having length of 780 cm and
64 cm and one silver coloured knife. These articles were seized.
14 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 15 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
The accused No.1 then showed the spot in the bedroom where they
had killed the deceased. Some female hair were scattered in the
room in a corner. They were seized. There was one bag in another
corner. The panchnama was prepared. It is produced on record at
Exhibit-135. He identified all of those articles produced in the
Court. Since it was late, PW-26 and his team kept the accused No.1
Rahul in Nalasopara police station. On the next day i.e. on
11.5.2014 they again went to the said flat for conducting search.
This time they seized around thirty newspapers. There was one bag
in the South East corner. The police found Aadhaar card and PAN
card of the accused No.1 Rahul and Aadhaar card of the accused
No.2 Jishan. Importantly, there was a bill and receipt of Super
Luggage Shop dated 6.5.2014 in the name of the accused No.1
Rahul. There were packets of condoms, bunch of keys etc.. There
were four mobile phone handsets with multiple SIM cards. There
were 55 bank passbooks, 56 ATM cards and 33 cheque books. In
the balcony, there was a dustbin and there was one pair of ladies
footwear (It was subsequently identified by the father of the
deceased as belonging to the deceased). One particular phone had
messages between Santosh and one person under pseudonym.
15 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 16 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
Those messages were sent on 22.4.2014, 23.4.2014 and 5.5.2014
mentioning that “R” was giving trouble and that she would be
beaten. The last message on 5.5.2014 was about making
arrangement to procure a chopper. That particular mobile phone
was seized. The panchnama was prepared, which was produced on
record at Exhibit-136. PW-26 then recorded the statements of
various witnesses. He gave requisition letters to produce the CCTV
footage from Fun Fiesta Multiplex at Nalasopara. He seized the
hard-disk of that CCTV footage. The footage was copied by the
technician Rajendra Jadhav on a DVD. It was sealed. He seized the
CCTV footage of Karishma Restaurant & Bar. According to the
prosecution case, after returning from Pune the accused Nos.1 & 2
met the accused No.3 Santosh at that Bar in the afternoon on
7.5.2014. He identified all those articles which were seized in his
presence. As far as finding of the dead body in a bag is concerned,
there was hardly any effective cross-examination of this witness. He
was asked about recovery at the instance of the accused No.1 and
as to how they went from Pune to Nalasopara. He explained that
there was no receipt of the toll as the police are exempted from
paying toll. On 10.5.2014 they had not conducted video shooting
16 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 17 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
of the panchnama at the Nalasopara flat. On 10.5.2014, they left
the New Home Classic Building at 10.50 p.m., but, he had no
documentary evidence to show that he had sealed the flat on
10.5.2014 and had opened it on the next day. As per his
investigation, the flat No.704 was given on rent through agent
Yogesh Mishra. He admitted that he had not collected a certificate
of the technician at Fun Fiesta Mall as per Section 65-B of the
Indian Evidence Act. Similarly no such certificate was collected
from the technician at Karishma Bar.
14.
PW-14 PHC Satish Dhole was attached to Local Crime
Branch, Pune Railway Police Station. He deposed about finding of
the dead body in the bag and finding of the SIM card with it. He
made a phone call from that SIM card to his own number and
found out a number of that SIM card of TATA Docomo company. He
obtained further details of the number. It was registered in the
name of one Tulshiram Savatkar. The call details were analyzed
and after that, as mentioned earlier, the accused were
apprehended.
15.
PW-28 ACP Arun More was the investigating officer. He
was working as Senior P.I.. He deposed about the investigation. He
17 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 18 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
deposed how they traced PW-25 Vivek Tiwari from the call details
of the SIM card found with the dead body and Tiwari’s phone.
Tiwari identified the photograph of the deceased. Three accused
were traced and arrested. PW-28 was present when the accused
were trapped and arrested. He deposed about the investigation as
was deposed by PW-26 PI Ramdas Shelke about recovery from the
accused No.1 Rahul. In addition, he deposed that he caused
collection of CCTV footage of Somatane Toll Naka and Urse Toll
Naka. He recorded statements of important witnesses. He deposed
that “R’s” father identified the footwear. He sent a letter to the bank
regarding 57 bank passbooks. He recorded statements of three
drivers with whom the accused Nos.1 & 2 had travelled from
Mumbai to Pune and back to Mumbai. He had arranged to conduct
the test identification parade on 18.6.2014. He received
information that the accused No.1 had committed offences of
forgery registered at Himachal Pradesh. He deposed about some
investigation in respect of accused No.4 but nothing much was
revealed. However, the accused no.4 is already acquitted from the
case. The birth-certificate of the deceased was produced on record
at Exhibit-389, but, he had not made any enquiry about that birth
18 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 19 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
certificate. According to that birth-certificate, R’s date of birth was
13.7.1998. That means she was below sixteen years of age on
7.5.2014.
In the cross-examination, he stated that the passbooks
were of different banks, but, he had not recorded statements of the
bank managers. He had made correspondence with the bank
managers but the correspondence was not filed with the charge-
sheet. He denied the suggestion that he had shown the accused to
the witnesses prior to the test identification parade. He denied
the suggestion that the offence was made out against PW-25
Tiwari but he had deliberately filed false charge-sheet against
accused Nos.1 to 4.
16.
The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is
produced on record at Exhibit-382. Very significantly, the two
pieces of nylon rope recovered at the instance of the accused No.1
Rahul matched with the nylon rope used to tie the hands of the
dead body. A longer piece was found from that bag.
17.
PW-22 PHC Dhananjay Dugane was a Police Naik who
had carried the muddemal to the Forensic Science Laboratory.
18.
PW-15 PSI Luis Makasare had taken part in the
19 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 20 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
investigation. He had collected the CCTV footage of Somatane
Phata Toll Naka. It showed that on 7.5.2014 a rickshaw had passed
through one lane between 8.38 a.m. to 8.40 a.m.. He also collected
the CCTV footage at Urse Toll Naka which revealed that the
accused Nos.1 & 2 were proceeding towards Mumbai. They were
walking. They sat in a white car after talking with the driver of that
car. He conducted the panchnamas of collection of CCTV footage.
They were produced on record at Exhibits-212 & 213. The accused
No.2 had shown willingness to point out the place where they had
thrown “R’s” clothes and other articles near a garbage bin at
Wadala, Mumbai. This statement was made on 17.5.2014 but when
the police reached Wadala, nothing was recovered from and
around that garbage bin.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that he did not
make enquiries about preservation of the CCTV footage at the Toll
Plaza. He did not obtain certificate under Section 65-B of the
Indian Evidence Act. He did not record the statement of the CCTV
operator. He admitted that as far as the rickshaw seen at Somatane
Toll Plaza is concerned, the registration number of the rickshaw or
the passengers were not visible.
20 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 21 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
19.
PW-20 Senior Police Inspector Abhay Parmar had also
taken part in the investigation. He had gone to Talegaon Railway
Station with PW-26 on receipt of information of finding of a trolly
bag containing a dead body. The dead body was taken to Sassoon
Hospital. He deposed that from 8.5.2014 onwards the Local Crime
Branch took over the investigation.
20.
PW-18 PSI Kamlesh Munnaswami had supervised
conduct of the inquest panchnama.
21.
PW-19 Dr. Vijay Jadhav had conducted the postmortem
examination on the dead body. He found following injuries on the
external genitals :
“Injuries to external genitals, as mentioned in column No.15
of postmortem report – blood oozing from vagina, hymen –
1] multiple old healed tears present – multiple perihymenal
contusions present, bluish, fresh. Labia Magora – Intact, no
injury, Labia Minora – contusion present over right side at 9
o’clock position of size 1 cm x 1 cm, bluish, fresh. Vaginal
wall – a tear present over posterior vaginal wall, of size 0.5
cm x 0.5 cm x mucosa deep, irregular, red, fresh. All genital
injuries are antemortem.”
21 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 22 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
. PW-19 also found the following external injuries :
“1] Contusion present over inner aspect, middle 1/3rd of
upper lip of size 3 cm x 1 cm irregular bluish.
2] Ligature mark present over antero-lateral aspect left side
of neck, of size 13 cm x 3 cm at and above the level of
thyroid cartilage, situated 5 cm below chin and 4 cm
below left mastoid, running obliquely and upwards,
reddish brown, on dissection hematoma present within
strap muscles on left side of size 4 cm x 3 cm, reddish,
hematoma present over posterior pharyangeal wall on right
side of size 3 cm x 1 cm and on left side of size 4 cm x 3
cm, reddish, thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone are intact.”
The injuries were antemortem in nature. The cause of
death was mentioned as death due to head injury with injury to
spine and spinal cord with ligature strangulation. He deposed that
the injuries to her private parts were possible only due to forceful
vaginal penetration. Injury No.1 in column No.17 i.e. column
mentioning external injuries, was possible due to act of resistance
in sexual assault. The strangulation was possible by dupatta. The
injuries in column No.19 i.e. hematoma under scalp was possible if
the dead person was banged on a hard and blunt object, a wall or
floor. The injuries to spine and spinal cord were in the nature of
fracture dislocation over C3- C2 vertebrae with extravasation of
blood in surrounding tissue. Underlying spinal cord was contused
and lacerated. Those injuries were possible due to forceful twisting
22 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 23 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
of head and banging the head on hard and blunt object or surface.
Those injuries were possible due to assault by one or more persons.
The postmortem notes are produced on record at Exhibit-263.
22.
Analysis of this evidence, including the cross-
examination, shows that though the accused have tried to dispute
these basic facts, there cannot be any doubt that the red trolly bag
with the dead body inside it, was found at Talegaon Railway
Station. The hands of the body were tied with yellow nylon rope.
There was a handkerchief in her mouth. A SIM card was recovered
from inside her underwear. The postmortem examination revealed
that she had died violent death and had suffered violent sexual
assault. The prosecution has proved these facts beyond any doubt.
The question is about the involvement of the accused in this case.
For that purpose the prosecution has relied on the other witnesses
to prove the other circumstances.
23.
PW-2 was “R’s” father. In his deposition, he stated that
the date of birth of his daughter was 13.7.1998. He was knowing
the accused No.3 Santosh since about 15 to 16 years prior to the
incident. He was married to one Pooja and had one son from that
wedlock. Before that he was married to some other lady. The
23 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 24 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
accused No.3 Santosh used to come to his house in his absence.
According to PW-2, “R” was treating the accused No.3 Santosh as
her brother. Fifteen days prior to 15.5.2014 when he came back to
his house, his wife had told that “R” was missing. He searched for
her and had gone to his native place in her search but did not lodge
any police complaint to save the honor of the family. On 8.5.2014,
the police officers approached him with his daughter’s photograph.
He identified it. He went to Sassoon Hospital and identified the
dead body. According to him, the accused No.3 Santosh was
creating nuisance in the locality and had performed forcible
marriage with Pooja. PW-2 identified the chappals and clothes of
the deceased. He identified the accused No.3.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that “R” had not
informed anybody where she was going and he admitted that he
had not stated to the police what he stated before the Court. His
attention was brought to certain portions from his police statement.
He accepted that he has stated those portions before the police. He
accepted that he had told the police that in the past also “R” had
left the house for about four to five days and that she was friendly
with one Shabnam who had informed that “R” had gone out.
24 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 25 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
24.
PW-3 Jayada Shaikh was knowing R’s family from 20
years prior to the incident. She also knew the accused No.3 Santosh
from his childhood. She deposed that she had seen the accused
No.3 Santosh, his wife and “R” near accused No.3 Santosh’s
motorcycle. “R” sat on his motorcycle and before PW-3 could ask
the accused No.3 anything, he went away on his motorcycle with
“R”. She deposed that the accused No.3 did not have good
character. He used to flirt with many girls. The people in the
locality were terrorized. He had criminal antecedents including
murder. Subsequently she came to know that “R” was murdered.
She identified the accused No.3 on Video Conferencing in the
Court. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. on
30.8.2014. She accepted the contents of that statement. It is
produced on record at Exhibit-104.
In the cross-examination, she emphasized that “R” was
taken away in her presence. After three days of discovery of the
dead body, the police approached PW-3 but at that time she had
not told them that the accused No.3 had taken “R” away in her
presence. She had not informed R’s father (PW-2) about the same.
She accepted that she had good relations with PW-2 and she had
25 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 26 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
attended the Court with him. She did not know the full name of the
accused No.3. Her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C..
th th
mentions that on 27 or 28 April, 2014 in the evening she had
seen the accused No.3 Santosh taking away “R” on his motorcycle.
The accused No.3 Santosh had created terror in the locality.
25.
PW-13 Shabnam Shaikh was a neighbour of the
deceased. She deposed that she was knowing one Pooja. The
accused No.3 used to visit Pooja’s house. PW-13 also knew “R”, who
was also staying near her house. She deposed that the accused
No.3 Santosh and “R” were knowing each other and they were
visiting each other’s house.
In the cross-examination, she admitted that she was
not talking with the accused No.3. She added that she was close
friend with “R” and used to share personal information but she did
not know about R’s male friend.
26.
PW-25 Vivek Tiwari is a very important witness in this
case. He deposed that in 2014 he was residing at Nalasopara,
Mumbai. He was working as a real estate agent in Jaymahakal Real
Estate situated at Nalasopara, Nile Moregaon, Guest House and the
second branch was at New Home Classic Building Shop No.14. PW-
26 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 27 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
25 was working in New Home Classic Building. It is the same
building where the accused No.1 Rahul was staying as per the
prosecution case. PW-25 deposed that on 24.4.2014, the deceased
came to his shop asking for a pen. She went to the opposite shop to
recharge her mobile phone. She wanted to use a pen. PW-25 asked
her name and as to where she was residing. She informed that she
th
was residing in Flat No.704 on the 7 floor of the same building.
She told PW-25 that she was residing with the accused No.1 Rahul
who was a friend of the accused No.3 Santosh. After this initial
interaction they spoke many times. She told him that the accused
No.1 Rahul had concealed her SIM card and requested PW-25 to
arrange another SIM card for her. PW-25 gave her a SIM card of
TATA Docomo company. According to the prosecution case, this is
the same SIM card found with the deceased. He further deposed
that the last two digits of that SIM card number were “35”. “R”
used to have regular conversations with him. She told him that the
accused No.3 Santosh came and raped her. She told him that the
accused No.1 Rahul and the accused No.2 Jishan also raped her.
The accused No.3 Santosh had torn her clothes. Accused No.3
Santosh asked “R” to go to the village but she was not willing. The
27 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 28 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
accused No.3 Santosh then called and told her that the accused
Nos.1 & 2 would come to the Railway Station and that he would be
there. Once, the accused No.1 Rahul had also torn her clothes. She
needed new clothes. PW-25 bought two pairs of clothes for her
from a market in front of Fun Fiesta Mall. On the next day, when he
made a phone call it was unanswered. He tried calling her number
throughout the day but there was no answer. On the next day, he
received a phone call from the same number. One police officer was
talking from the other end. He made enquiries with PW-25. Then
the police officers came to him and showed him a photograph of
the deceased. He identified the photograph and saw that she was
wearing the same dress which he had gifted her. His statement was
recorded and subsequently he was called for test identification
parade. In the test identification parade he identified all the three
accused. His statement was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C..
He accepted that the contents of the statement were correct. That
statement is produced on record at Exhibit-335. He identified the
clothes seized from the dead body. He identified the accused who
was present through Video Conferencing.
In the cross-examination, he deposed that he did not
28 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 29 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
give any document to the police to show that there were two
branches of his office. He used to talk with “R” on daily basis. He
used to talk with her once or twice in a day. This went on for about
ten days. There were some contradictions tried to be brought on
record from his police statement but that line of cross examination
was not pursued with the investigating officer to prove those
contradictions. He deposed that “R” used to call him frequently and
used to tell him that she wanted to marry him but he had told her
that he could not marry her without the permission of his parents.
PW-25 had asked permission from his parents but they had refused.
He denied the suggestion that he wanted to get rid of “R”. He was
then cross-examined about the test identification parade. He
denied the suggestion that the police had told him about the
identity of the accused. Before entering the jail, the police had
given him some paper. He could not tell at what time the police
came to the building with the accused. He answered that the
accused did not come to the building in his presence at any time.
His cross-examination was conducted to show that during the test
identification parade this witness had an opportunity to see the
accused. He denied the suggestion that since there were only three
29 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 30 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
accused on Video Conferencing, he identified the accused. In his
statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. there is one
importation narration. The deceased had told PW-25 that the
accused No.2 had visited accused No.1. She could not complete the
conversation. Before switching off the phone, she told him that the
accused Nos.1 & 3 were coming. When PW-25 tried to contact her,
she did not answer. At 10.30 p.m. she gave a missed called. PW-25
made a return call. At that time she told him that all the three
accused had just left the flat. At that time PW-25 had told her that
they had passed from there in front of him. After some time, he met
“R”. At that time she was crying and saying that she did not want to
go to the village in Uttar Pradesh.
27.
PW-23 Rohit Jaiswal had deposed about the accused
No.1 Rahul residing in the said flat No.704 in that building. He
deposed that in March, 2014 he was residing at Wadala, Mumbai.
He knew the accused No.1 Rahul. Both of them were working as
Salesmen in a mobile service provider company for about six
months. Then both of them had left the job. They had left their
houses. They were travelling in a taxi and were discussing about
renting a room. The taxi driver told them that there was a room
30 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 31 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
available at Nalasopara and his son would give that room on rent
to them. They went to one Mishra who took them to one Gupta.
PW-23 gave Rs.20,000/- to Gupta and executed an agreement for
leave and license for eleven months. That money was given to PW-
23 by the accused No.1 Rahul. PW-23 made that agreement. He
had rented that room. He deposed that he himself and the accused
No.1 Rahul went to reside there but within a couple of days he left
the room and he again came back to reside with his classmate
Kamble. He identified the accused No.1 through video
conferencing in the Court.
In the cross-examination, he deposed that he had left
his house because of his personal reasons. Before that he had a
discussion with the accused No.1 Rahul. He denied the suggestion
that he was deposing falsely that he stayed in that rented room for
two days and thereafter the accused No.1 Rahul was residing in
that room.
28.
PW-12 Narayan Gujar was a grocery shop owner in
New Home Classic Building, Nalasopara. His shop was situated in
“A” Wing of the said apartment. He knew accused No.1 Rahul. PW-
12 deposed that the accused No.1 Rahul was staying in Flat
31 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 32 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
No.704. He used to come to his shop to buy grocery and other
articles. PW-12 further deposed that the accused No.1 was staying
with “R”. He knew “R” because she also used to visit his shop for
buying grocery. Her age was between 15 to 16 years. On 6.5.2014
at about 6.00 p.m. to 6.30 p.m. the accused No.1 Rahul had come
to his shop and bought some eatables. At that time, the accused
No.2 Jishan was accompanying with him. The accused No.1 was
having a red trolly bag. On the next day, Rahul told one Shailesh
Mishra that “R” had gone to her native place. On 8.5.2014 he came
to know that Rahul and his friend had murdered “R”. PW-12’s
statement was recorded on 11.5.2014. His statement was also
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. He identified the accused
Nos. 1 & 2 in the Court. He identified the red trolly bag Article No.1.
In the cross-examination, there is one stray statement
made by him that he had seen the accused No.1 Rahul at 8.30 a.m.
on the next day. This was in the context of the accused No.1
coming to his shop in the evening of 6.5.2014. He also accepted
that he was running his shop till evening. There was no reference
that he had seen the accused No.1 on 7.5.2014 at 8.30 a.m. in his
statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C..
32 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 33 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
29.
PW-17 Shravansingh Rajpurohit was the owner of the
shop from where the accused had purchased the bag. In May, 2014
the police came to his shop and showed him a receipt. He identified
that receipt. It was issued by his shop. He deposed that, on
6.5.2014 three persons had come to his shop to purchase a bag.
They wanted a big bag. He sold a big red bag for Rs.1200/-. His
statements were recorded by the police and by the Magistrate. He
had attended the test identification parade. He identified two
persons in that parade. However, he did not identify the accused
produced in the Court. He identified the bag in the Court which
was shown to him as Article No.1. Since he did not identity the
accused, the APP put a suggestion in the nature of cross-
examination that he was not identifying the accused at their
instance. He denied that suggestion.
In the cross-examination, he stated that the police had
shown him photographs of the accused. He had not given the
receipt book to the police. He denied the suggestion that he had
issued the receipt in the name of accused No.1 Rahul at the
instance of the police.
33 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 34 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
30.
The prosecution has examined three drivers in whose
vehicles the accused Nos.1 & 2 had travelled. As per the
prosecution case the timeline shows that they first travelled with
the dead body in a bag from Nalasopara to Sion in one taxi. Then
they travelled to Pune in another taxi. From Pune, they went to
Talegaon Railway Station in an auto-rickshaw. While coming back
to Mumbai they sat in a private car near Urse Toll Plaza. The
prosecution has examined the drivers of the taxis and the car.
31.
PW-11 D.R. Shivahare had taken the accused Nos.1 & 2
from Nalasopara to Sion Circle at about 12.30 a.m. in the midnight
between 6.5.2014 and 7.5.2014. He deposed that he was having
Honda Accent Taxi. He started plying his taxi on 6.5.2014 at 7.00
p.m.. His friend Mishra called him and gave him one mobile phone
number and requested to take that customer to Sion. PW-11 then
made a phone call to that number. The receiver of the call told
him to come near Fun Fiesta Mall at 12.30 a.m.. PW-11
accordingly went there. Within 15 minutes, two persons
approached him. They were dragging a maroon trolly bag. They
kept the bag in the dickey. They were having another small bag
with them. They told him to take them to Sion. They reached Sion.
34 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 35 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
They paid the taxi-fare and toll fare. Then he left. After some days,
the police called him to Pune for enquiry. They informed him about
the murder. He then was called to Nalasopara police station. The
police showed him a photograph of the deceased girl and the trolly
bag. He was called to Yerwada Jail for identification of the accused.
According to him, he identified both the persons who had travelled
in his taxi with that trolly bag. His statement was recorded under
Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. It is produced on record at Exhibit-188. He
identified the trolly bag shown to him in the Court as Article No.1.
He was shown the CCTV footage in front of Fun Fiesta Mall. He
identified himself going away with his taxi.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that the taxi
number was not visible in the CCTV footage. He also admitted that
the CCTV footage did not show anybody approaching him with a
luggage or a bag. He could not give details of the said Mishra who
had called him. Mishra had called him at about 9.30 p.m. to 10.00
p.m.. He admitted that at Nalasopara police station, the police told
him that two thieves had escaped and they wanted to make
enquiries about them. He also admitted that thereafter the police
showed him photograph of two boys. After that he deposed that
35 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 36 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
after the police had shown him photographs at Nalasopara, in
about a week he was called by the police at Pune. He admitted that
the police had shown him photographs of two persons and had told
him that they had committed theft when his statement was
recorded before the Judicial Magistrate and then subsequently they
told him that the accused had committed murder and rape. In
further cross-examination, he admitted that when the police had
called him to Nalasopara police station at that time the accused
were sitting in the police vehicle and that he had seen the accused.
Thus, it can be seen that his identification of the
accused in the test identification parade is vitiated because he was
not only shown the photographs but prior to that he had also seen
the accused. Learned APP re-examined him. At that time he
identified the accused Nos.1 & 2 in the Court. He also accepted that
the accused seen by him in the Court were already seen by him at
the instance of the police and, therefore, he had identified them at
Yerwada Central Prison. Therefore, identification of the accused
Nos.1 & 2 by this witness loses its significance but his evidence can
be considered for the fact that two persons with a trolly bag had
travelled in his taxi from Nalasopara to Sion, and that he had
36 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 37 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
identified the bag in the Court.
32.
PW-6 Laxman Hajare is an important witness in this
case. He was the taxi driver who had taken the accused Nos.1 & 2
from Dadar to Pune. His taxi was hired by the accused No.3
Santosh. He deposed that he was working as a driver with one
Vinod Singh who was having the business of Tourist Cars by the
name “Sai Tourist”. He was having three vehicles. There were
other three drivers working with PW-6. On 6.5.2014, Vinod Singh
called him for work. He told him to go to Mumbai in a red car
No.MH-14-BC-4965. PW-6 was a resident of Chikhali. He took
some passengers at Chinchwad Railway Station at about 5.00 p.m.
and reached Dadar at about 8.00 p.m.. He parked his car near
Shivneri bus stop at Dadar. He did not get any passenger for
returning to Pune. Therefore, he slept in his car. At 4.30 a.m. one
person woke him up and asked him what fare he would charge for
going to Pune. He quoted the fare as Rs.200/- per passenger, but,
that person wanted to hire his taxi exclusively for Rs.1500/-. PW-6
quoted the figure of Rs.2200/-. However, the said person did not
agree to the quoted fare and left. After some time, the same person
returned with other two persons and this time he was ready to pay
37 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 38 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
the amount of Rs.2200/-. PW-6 then told him that he would take
one more passenger in the car. In the meantime they kept their
luggage including one red bag in the dickey and the two persons
sat in the car. PW-6 took the fare in advance. The person who had
met him first and had negotiated with him regarding the fare did
not travel to Pune. PW-6 took one more passenger at Vashi, who sat
in the front, and was dropped at Shivaji Nagar, Pune. The two
passengers sitting in the back, who boarded at Dadar, got down at
the bus stop in front of Pune Station. They took their luggage but at
that time PW-6 did not notice it. On 20.5.2014 the police
approached him with his employer. They made enquiries about the
passengers whom he had brought to Pune from Mumbai. The car
was seized by them. His statement was recorded by the police. On
17.6.2014, he attended the test identification parade at Yerwada
Jail. At that time, there were 10-15 persons in the parade. He
identified two persons who had travelled in his car. After half an
hour, he was made to identify one more person from about 5-6
suspects. This time he identified one more person as the same
person who had first met him and had negotiated about the fare.
PW-6’s statement was recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. on
38 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 39 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
5.9.2014. He identified the accused Nos.1 & 2 in the Court as the
persons who had travelled with him in his car. He also identified
the accused No.3 as the person who had settled the fare. He
identified the red trolly bag which was shown to him as Article
No.1.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that he was
carrying passengers without permit. He stated that the trolly bag at
Article No.1 was big. He denied that on 7.5.2014, when the
passengers sat in the car, the light was dim. He denied the
suggestion that he had given description of the persons who had
travelled with him but he could not explain as to why it was not
written in his police statement. This line of cross-examination was
not pursued with the investigating officer. He further stated that he
had thrown away the bill receipt. He denied the suggestion that the
accused were shown to him before the police recorded his
statement. He did not know as to why it was not written in his
police statement that the person who had settled the fare had gone
away and did not travel with him. However, this fact is recorded in
his statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. He denied the
suggestion that the police showed him the accused prior to the test
39 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 40 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
identification parade.
33.
PW-7 Vinod Kumar Singh was the employer of PW-6.
He corroborated the evidence of PW-6 about PW-6 going to
Mumbai on 6.5.2014 in his car. On 20.5.2014 he had gone to Uttar
Pradesh to attend a wedding in the family. The vehicle was seized
by the police and it was returned after four months under the order
of the Court. He came to know about the murder and the trolly bag
being carried in his car
34.
PW-16 Imtiyaz Ansari had taken the accused Nos.1 & 2
from Urse Toll Plaza to Dadar and he had identified both of them in
the test identification parade held on 18.6.2014. He deposed that
he was serving as a driver in a Tours and Travels Conpany. On
7.5.2014, at about 5.30 a.m., he carried one family from Borivali to
Wakad, Pune. Then he started returning to Mumbai via Urse Toll
Plaza on the expressway. He stopped after crossing Urse Toll Plaza
to go to washroom. When he was returning towards his vehicle,
two persons approached him and told him that they also wanted to
go to Mumbai. They negotiated the fare. He told them that he
would charge Rs.200/- per seat. They sat in the car. PW-16 was
waiting for more passengers but those two persons told him that
40 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 41 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
they had to attend a meeting at Dadar urgently and showed
willingness to pay Rs.900/-. Therefore, he took them to Dadar bus-
stand. He did not wait for other passengers. They paid Rs.900/-.
Subsequently he came to know that those two persons had
committed a murder. He was called by the police. His statement
was recorded. The statement was also recorded by the Magistrate.
That statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is produced
on record at Exhibit-232. He attended the test identification parade
at Yerwada Prison. He identified the accused nos. 1 & 2 in the test
identification parade. He also identified both of them in the Court.
They were produced through Video Conferencing.
In the cross-examination, he stated that his company
had not issued an appointment letter to him. He did not hand over
his identity card to the police. He travelled in Indica Vistsa Car.
That car had a small dickey. Significantly his evidence shows that
the accused Nos.1 & 2 while returning back to Dadar did not have
the trolly bag with them. He admitted that he would pick up
passengers on highway illegally. He denied the suggestion that he
was in touch with the police.
35.
The prosecution examined some pancha witnesses in
41 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 42 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
respect of the CCTV footage taken from certain spots. PW-8 Avinash
Kurane was one such pancha. He deposed that he was an
electrician working with Fun Fiesta Company. On 23.5.2014, his
Manager told him about the incident captured in the CCTV camera.
The recording was shown to him. He observed that two persons
came in front of the gate of Fun Fiesta Company with a red
coloured bag. After some time, one taxi arrived there. The taxi
driver opened the dickey. Out of those two persons, one person
kept the red trolly bag in the dickey and they went away. This
recording was copied on one DVD and delivered to Police Officer
Rajendra Jadhav. It was sealed. The police also seized the hard-
disc of recording. The panchnama was prepared. It is produced on
record at Exhibit-173.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that the colour of
the trolly bag was not identifiable. The faces of the persons were
not seen clearly and they were blurred.
36.
PW-10 Tanaji Chakrupe was a pancha for various
panchnamas including seizure of some CCTV footages. He deposed
that on 13.5.2014 he was called at LCB at Tadiwala Road. He went
there. The police took him to Somathane Phata Toll Naka. They
42 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 43 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
went to the recording room. They watched the CCTV recording of
7.5.2014. He observed that one rickshaw had passed from a two-
wheeler lane. There were two passengers in the back seat with a
red trolly bag. The police copied that CCTV footage in one DVD in
his presence. The DVD was packed in one envelope and the labels
of their signatures were affixed on it. From there they went to Urse
Toll Naka. Again the CCTV footage of 7.5.2014 was seen. They saw
that the two accused were walking on the road from Pune to
Mumbai. There was one white car. They sat in that car and then
they went towards Mumbai. This CCTV was also copied on one
DVD and a panchnama was prepared. Those CCTV footages were
produced on the DVD in the Court at Exhibits-183 & 184. He was
again called by the LCB officers on 20.5.2014. He acted as pancha
in seizure of the Mahindra Scorpio car bearing No. MH 14-BC-4965
in which the accused had travelled from Dadar to Mumbai. He was
also a pancha for the arrest of the accused No.4.
In the cross-examination, he admitted that the rickshaw
number was not seen in the recording. The driver and the two
passengers were not seen clearly in the rickshaw. The registration
number of the white car was not seen in the CCTV footage of Urse
43 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 44 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
Toll Plaza. The faces of two persons were not clear.
37.
PW-9 Sandip Shetty was a pancha in whose presence
the CCTV footage of Karishma Bar was seized. He was called by his
Manager on 23.5.2014 to act as a pancha. The police were present.
The CCTV recording was played. They saw that one person came
at the first instance. He was joined by the other two persons after
about half an hour. They ate their food and they sat there till 2.45
p.m.. Then they left. The panchnama was prepared. The CCTV
footage was copied on a pendrive. The panchnama was produced
on record at Exhibit-177.
In the cross-examination, he stated that faces in the CD
produced at Exhibit-178 were blurred and not identifiable. He
further admitted that on 23.5.2014 the CCTV cameras and the
storage device were not working.
38.
PW-21 Tahsildar Lejindra Bobade had conducted the
test identification parade. He deposed that he was an Executive
Magistrate. He received a letter dated 23.5.2014 requesting to hold
the test identification parade in C.R. No.95/2014. He was a Naib
Tahsildar at Tehsildar Office at Vadgaon Maval. He forwarded that
letter to the Prison Authority. The test identification parade was
44 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 45 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
conducted on 18.6.2014 at Yerwada Prison. He went there. He
requested for the dummies. He selected twelve dummies who were
looking similar to the accused. He then deposed about the test
identification parade. In the first round, the accused Nos.1 & 2
were put for identification. According to him, PW-11 Shivhare (the
taxi driver from Nalasopara to Sion) identified accused No.1
Rahul,but, did not identify the accused No.2 Jishan. PW-17
Shravansingh Rajpurohit (the bag shop owner from where the bag
was purchased) identified the accused Nos.1 & 2. After that PW-6
Laxman Hajare (taxi driver from Dadar to Pune) identified both the
accused Nos.1 & 2. Then PW-16 Imtiyaz Ansari (driver from Urse
Toll Plaza to Dadar) was asked to identify the accused but he did
not identify the accused No.1. He identified the accused No.2. After
that PW-25 Vivek Tiwari was asked to identify the accused. He
identified both the accused Nos.1 & 2.
In the second round, the accused No.3 was made to
stand for identification. PW-21 deposed that he selected six
dummies who were similar looking to the accused No.3. He also
added three more dummies. PW-11 Shivahare did not identify the
accused No.3 but in any case it is not the prosecution case that the
45 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 46 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
accused No.3 was present at Fun Fiesta Mall. PW-17 Shravansingh
Rajpurohit (the bag shop owner) identified the accused No.3. PW-
6 Laxman Hajare identified the accused No.3. PW-16 Imtiyaz
Ansari did not identify the accused No.3. According to the
prosecution case at that place near Urse Phata the accused No.3
was not present. PW-25 Vivek Tiwari then identified the accused
No.3. The test identification memorandum panchnama is produced
on record at Exhibit-286.
PW-21 was extensively cross-examined by the defence
as to whether he had made proper arrangements for the witnesses
to sit, what precautions he had taken etc.. But his evidence was not
shaken in the cross-examination. He deposed that that he did not
change the dummies after identification by each of the witnesses.
But this was not important because there is nothing to show that
the witnesses could interact with each other and describe about the
dummies. He accepted that he had not mentioned in the
memorandum as to for what purposes those witnesses were
identifying the accused.
39.
PW-4 Mahesh Gaikwad was a pancha witness. On
7.5.2014 he was present when the panchnama of seizure of clothes
46 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 47 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
of the victim and the bag was prepared. He was a witness to
seizure of the SIM card, nylon rope, the clothes of the victim and
the bag. Those articles were seized and sealed in his presence and
the panchnama is produced on record at Exhibit-120. On 9.5.2014,
he was a pancha when the accused were arrested and their
personal belongings were seized. He deposed that when the
accused No.1 Rahul was arrested, apart from other articles one
mobile phone was seized. Similarly from the accused No.2 Jishan
apart from other articles one mobile phone was seized. He further
stated that even search of the accused No.3 showed that he was
possessing one mobile phone apart from other articles. That
panchnama is produced on record at Exhibit-130. He identified the
mobile phones in the Court. On 17.5.2014, he was again called in
the LCB office. The accused No.2 Jishan Kureshi showed
willingness to show the place where the other clothes of the victim
were thrown by them near a dust-bin at Dadar but when the police
and the panchas went to that place, nothing was found. He
identified both the accused in the Court. He identified all the three
accused in the Court. The arrest panchnama is produced on record
at Exhibit-130 which shows that at that time the accused No.3 was
47 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 48 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
also arrested on 9.5.2014 at the same time. Significance of this
arrest and seizure panchnama at Exhibit-121 and Exhibit-130 is
that the panchnama recorded on 9.5.2014 between 2.20 p.m. to
3.00 p.m. specifically mentions the IMEI numbers of the mobile
handsets seized from all three accused. This is significant because
the prosecution has connected these IMEI numbers with the
respective telephone numbers of those handsets. The call detail
records are, therefore, important in this case.
In the cross-examination he deposed that two mobile
phones were recovered from the accused No.2 but he coud not give
description of those handsets. There is hardly any effective cross-
examination of this important witness.
40.
PW-5 Ashok Payal is another important pancha witness
in this case. He was called by the Crime Detection Branch for
preparing a panchnama on 10.5.2014. He deposed that at that time
the accused No.1 Rahul was in the custody of the police. He gave a
memorandum statement that he would show the place where he
had kept a knife, nylon rope and cash of Rs.62,200/-. The
memorandum statement was recorded. It is produced on record at
Exhibit-134. Pursuant to that memorandum statement the panchas
48 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 49 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
and the police started from Pune to Nalasopara. They were led by
th
the accused No.1 Rahul to Flat No.704 on the 7 floor of Yashwant
Nagar area building. The key was kept with one Mishra. He came
with them and opened the room. They entered the flat. The
accused No.1 Rahul climbed on the kitchen platform and took out
one black sack kept behind the water-tank. It was opened. There
was an amount of Rs.62,200/-. There was one mobile phone
handset and there was a yellow nylon rope and a knife. All those
articles were seized. That panchnama is produced on record at
Exhibit-135. He identified those articles produced in the Court. On
11.5.2014, again he was called by the police for taking search of
the same house. They went there. At that time they found about 40
to 45 ATM cards, passbooks etc.. Importantly they also seized a
receipt of purchase of a red bag. This panchnama is produced on
record at Exhibit-136. The memorandum of accused No.1 Rahul’s
statement was recorded between 2.00 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. on
10.5.2014. The recovery panchnama then started at 2.40 p.m. and
it ended at 10.50 p.m.. The house search panchnama was
conducted on 11.5.2014 between 9.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. on
11.5.2014.
49 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 50 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
In the cross-examination, he deposed that after
reaching Nalasopara they first went to the police station and then
they went to the flat. They were there for about one hour. This
witness identified the accused No.1 in the Court. The panchnama
at Exhibit-136 regarding house search on 11.5.2014 mentions that
one mobile phone was checked for the messages and there were
four objectionable messages dated 22.4.2014, 23.4.2014 and
5.5.2014. Two of them were of 22.4.2014. The first three messages
were regarding complaints against “R” that she was causing trouble
and the last message was for asking to arrange for a chopper.
However, the pancha (PW-5) has not deposed about this important
messages and there is no further investigation in particular about
these messages.
41.
PW-24 Chetan Patil was the Nodal Officer working with
Bharati Airtel Cellular Company at Swargate, Pune. He received a
letter from the police on 11.6.2014. He was requested to supply
information of four mobile phones and CDR between the period of
5.5.2014 to 8.5.2014. He has mentioned the phone numbers in his
deposition. The important phone numbers were “7709808065”,
which according to the prosecution case was used by the accused
50 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 51 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
No.2 Jishan Kureshi. The other important number was
“9665184135” which according to the prosecution case was used
by the accused No.1 Rahul. The CDR showed their location during
the relevant period. The CDR is produced on record at Exhibit-318.
This CDR is very important in this case. He also issued certificate
under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act. It is produced on record at
Exhibit-319. The CDR had different columns, as follows :
(i) Calling number, (ii) Called number, (iii) Date, (iv)
Time, (v) Duration, (vi) & (vii) Tower locations,
(viii) Call type, (ix) IMEI number, (x) IMSI number,
(xi) Connection type, (xii) SMS center number, and
(xiii) Roaming network.
He deposed that the mobile phone of the accused No.1
showed activity between 1.20 a.m. to 7.45 a.m. on 7.5.2014 in
Mumbai circle. After that, the tower location was shown at Railway
Station, Pune, then at Maval, Pune, then at Talegaon, Pune, then at
Kamshet, Pune, and then back to Nalasopara. Similarly the analysis
of the call details of the phone used by the accused No.2 was at the
locations of Vadgaon, Old Pune highway and then Nalasopara on
7.5.2014.
The prosecution has connected these phone numbers
51 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 52 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
with the respective accused from the IMEI numbers of the mobile
phones seized from them at the time of arrest and through this call
data analysis which connected those numbers with the phone
numbers.
In the cross-examination, he was asked about
registration of these phone numbers, number of tower locations
between Nalasopara to Pune. Mobile phone number “7709808065”
attributed to the accused No.2 was registered in the name of one
Jyoti Gaygavali.
42.
PW-27 Vishal Kokadwar was working with Forensic
Science Laboratory, Kalina as a Scientific Officer. He analyzed the
hard-discs sent to him. He analyzed the CCTV footage recordings.
He also analyzed the data in various mobile phones.
43.
This is the evidence led by the prosecution in this case.
44.
Learned counsel Shri Deokar made the following
submissions on behalf of the accused No.1 Rahul:
i. The case is based on the circumstantial evidence. The
prosecution has not proved any of the circumstances beyond
a reasonable doubt. The chain of circumstances is not
complete. PW-25 Vivek Tiwari, who was the star witness for
52 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 53 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
the prosecution did not know accused No.1. There is nothing
to show that he had seen him anytime. PW-25 Vivek Tiwari’s
conduct is unnatural. If he was aware of such serious crime
of rape being continuously committed on “R”, he should have
informed the police about the same but he did not inform
anybody about it. He did not try to rescue “R”.
ii.
PW-12 Narayan Gujar in the cross-examination made a
statement that he had seen the accused No.1 Rahul at his
shop at 8.30 a.m. on 7.5.2014. In that case, the prosecution
fails, as according to them the accused No.1 Rahul had
travelled to Pune from Mumbai at that point of time.
iii. The CCTV footage was not clear. The witnesses have
admitted that the faces were not clear. The colour of the bag
was not seen. Most importantly there is no certificate under
Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act and, therefore, this
evidence is required to be discarded.
iv. PW-17 Shravansingh Rajpurohit, the bag shop owner, was
declared hostile. He has not identified any of the accused
including the accused No.1 in the Court.
v. The police officers have accepted that Talegaon Railway
53 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 54 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
Station was a crowded place and, therefore, it was not
possible for anyone to keep a big bag near the platform
without anyone from the crowd noticing it and reporting it to
the police immediately.
vi. The recovery evidence from Flat No.704 is not believable.
The keys were with one Mishra, who is not examined.
Admittedly, the panchas and the police had started from Pune
to Nalasopara at around 2.30 p.m. on 10.5.2014 when it was
not possible to start recovery panchnama immediately at
around 2.40 p.m. on 10.5.2014 at Nalasopara which was at a
distance of at least four hours travel.
vii. The recovery of articles is not believable. The articles were
planted in that flat. He submitted that when the panchas and
the police had entered that flat on 10.5.2014, they had not
noticed around 50 passbooks and ATM cards but surprisingly
on the next day i.e. on 11.5.2014 all those articles were
recovered. He, therefore, submitted that those articles were
planted in the flat.
viii. There is no evidence to show as to how the police traced PW-
6 Laxman Hajare. Therefore, he was clearly a got up witness.
54 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 55 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
There is no connecting evidence to show as to how the
accused No.1 Rahul travelled from Pune to Somathane
Phata. The CCTV footage did not show the rickshaw and the
passengers clearly. There is nothing to show that the accused
No.1 Rahul had any connection with Flat No.704. The
agreement regarding that flat was not with the accused No.1
Rahul. There is no evidence to show that the accused No.1
Rahul had any interaction or connection with the accused
Nos.2 or 3. The accused No.1 was never seen at Wadala
where “R” was residing with her family. None of the
witnesses had seen them together.
45.
Submissions of learned counsel Ms. Maindad on behalf
of the accused No.2 Jishan Kureshi are as follows :
i. She submitted that the accused No.2 Jishan had no
connection with the accused No.1 Rahul or the accused No.3
Santosh. He had no motive to commit this murder.
ii. There is no evidence to show that he committed rape on “R”.
His identification by the witnesses is not beyond doubt.
iii. There is no recovery of any incriminating article at his
instance.
55 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 56 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
iv. The CCTV footages are not clear. She supported the
submissions of Shri Deokar in respect of inadmissibility of
those CCTV footage.
v. She submitted that the shop owner from where the bag was
purchased did not identify him. The grocery shop owner had
never seen him.
46.
Learned counsel Shri Vagal appearing for the accused
No.3 Santosh made the following submissions :
i. The evidence of the father of the deceased does not assist the
prosecution in any case. Admittedly, his entire deposition is in
the form of omission. He had not stated anything to the
police, that he had deposed before the Court.
ii. PW-3 Jayada Shaikh’s evidence cannot be treated as an
evidence of ‘last seen together’ because the dead body was
discovered much later. She has not deposed clearly as to on
which date exactly the accused No.3 Santosh had taken “R”
with him.
iii.
The accused No.3 Santosh had no connection with the flat
No.704 where allegedly the murder was committed.
56 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 57 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
iv.
There were no messages exchanged between the accused
Nos.1 & 3. There is nothing to show that the accused Nos.1 &
3 were in any way connected. Even as per the prosecution
case he had not travelled to Pune and back.
v. The meeting in Karishma Bar is not proved because the CCTV
footage is not admissible and the video is not clear.
vi. Nobody from the area of Nalasopara had seen the accused
No.3 visiting that particular flat. Even PW-25 Vivek Tiwari
had not seen him near that flat.
vii. There is no evidence to show that the accused No.3 had
withdrawn the amount of Rs.75,000/- and had paid the
accused No.1.
viii. The evidence of PW-6 Laxman Hajare is doubtful. There is
important omission from his police statement regarding the
accused No.3 negotiating the fare and going away. In any
case, identification of the accused No.3 by PW-6 Laxman
Hajare is not free from doubt.
ix. The conduct of test identification parade shows that it was
57 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 58 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
held in two rounds. In the first round, twelve dummies were
kept for identification of the accused Nos.1 & 2. Out of them,
three dummies were repeated and three different dummies
were added when the accused No.3 was made to stand in the
test identification parade.
x. At the highest even it is assumed that the accused No.3 had
arranged for the taxi, there is nothing to show that the
accused No.3 was aware as to what the accused Nos.1 & 2
were carrying in the trolly bag.
47.
Submissions by Ms. Kranti Hiwrale, learned APP for
the State and by Shri Tamhankar and Shri Kanani, learned counsel
for the Respondent No.2:
i. Learned APP submitted that it was a cruel murder. Before the
murder, the victim was brutally assaulted. She was subjected
to violent sexual assault. It is only because of the sharp
intelligent step taken by the victim to conceal the SIM card,
this offence could be detected.
ii. There is no substance in the submission that since Talegaon
Railway Station was a crowded place, the bag could not have
58 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 59 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
been left or abandoned at that place without anybody
noticing it.
iii.
The most important witness i.e. PW-25 Vivek Tiwari has given
clear evidence against all the three accused. The information
given by the deceased to this witness is admissible. This
information relates to all the three accused and relying on
this evidence alone the conviction can be sustained.
iv. All the important witnesses regarding travel etc. have
identified the accused in the Court.
v. It was a preplanned murder. The accused had purchased a
bag before committing the murder on 6.5.2014. A receipt was
found in the house of the accused No.1. The same bag was
identified by various witnesses.
vi. The CDR produced on record connects the accused with the
mobile phone handsets seized from them. The CDR is
incriminating showing the complicity of the accused.
vii. There is recovery of nylon rope and a knife from the flat
occupied by the accused No.1. The forensic report shows that
59 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 60 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
the pieces of nylon rope recovered from the accused No.1’s
house matched with the nylon rope recovered from the trolly
bag, which was used for tying the hands of the deceased.
viii. The prosecution has established each and every circumstance
right from the time of taking away “R” from Wadala by the
accused No.3, keeping her at Nalasopara, commission of rape
on her, her murder in the night of 6.5.2014 and 7.5.2014,
carrying her dead body in the trolly bag from Nalasopara to
Dadar and then from Dadar to Pune, abandoning the bag at
Talegaon Railway Station by the accused Nos.1 & 2, and then
both of them returning to Mumbai and meeting the accused
No.3. The CDR and the tower locations established their
presence at those various places. Thus, the prosecution has
proved each and every circumstance against the accused
forming a complete chain point unerringly to the guilt of all
the three accused.
Reasons and conclusions :
48.
We have considered these submissions. The prosecution
first needed to prove as to how “R” was residing at Nalasopara
60 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:04 :::
: 61 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
when her family was staying at Wadala. For that purpose the
prosecution has examined PW-2 father of “R”, PW-3 Jayada Shaikh
a neighbour at Wadala and PW-13 Shabnam Shaikh a friend of the
deceased. Though PW-2 had not given detailed statement to the
police but it is undisputed that since last week of April, 2014 “R”
was not found at Wadala. This fact is corroborated by PW-2 father
of the deceased, PW-3 Jayada Shaikh and PW-13 Shabnam Shaikh.
49.
PW-3 Jayada Shaikh’s evidence is important. She has
deposed about the accused No.3 Santosh taking away “R” on his
motorcycle. Though she had not given the dates but her statement
th th
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. mentions those dates as 27 or 28
April, 2014. Her evidence can be relied on to prove that the
accused No.3 had taken “R” with him on his motorcycle and after
that nobody had seen her at Wadala.
50.
As per the prosecution case, “R” was then kept in Flat
th
NO.704 on 7 floor in New Home Classic Building. Learned
counsel for the accused No.1 Rahul tried to submit that the accused
No.1 Rahul had no connection with that flat; but the prosecution
has examined PW-23 Rohit Jaiswal to show as to how that flat was
61 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 62 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
taken on rent by PW-23 Rohit Jaiswal and the accused No.1 Rahul
and as to how PW-23 Rohit Jaiswal had left that flat within a
couple of days. The evidence of this witness PW-23 Rohit Jaiswal is
clear enough to show that the accused No.1 Rahul was occupying
that flat.
51.
PW-12 Narayan Gujar was a grocery shop owner having
his shop in the same building New Home Classic Building. He knew
the accused No.1 Rahul. He has categorically stated that the
accused No.1 Rahul was staying in flat No.704 of New Home
Classic Building. He was staying with “R”. This witness also knew
“R” because she used to come to his shop for buying grocery. He
has mentioned her age between 15 to 16 years. At this stage, it
must be noted that the age of the victim is hardly in dispute. Her
birth-certificate is produced on record which shows that her date of
birth was 13.7.1998. It is produced on record at Exhibit-389. At the
time of incident, she was below sixteen years.
52.
PW-12 Narayan Gujar’s evidence is also important on
another aspect because he has deposed that on 6.5.2014 at about
6.30 p.m., the accused No.1 Rahul had come to his shop to buy
something. At that time, the accused No.2 Jishan was also with
62 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 63 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
him. They had a red coloured trolly bag with them. On the next
day, the accused No.1 Rahul had told one Shailesh that “R” had
gone to her native place. The murder had taken place in the night
between 6.5.2014 and 7.5.2014. PW-12 Narayan Gujar had
identified both the accused Nos.1 & 2. He had also identified the
red bag which he had seen in the evening on 6.5.2014. That bag
was identified by him in the Court. Learned counsel for the accused
No.1 tried to take advantage of one sentence from his cross-
examination when he deposed that he saw the accused No.1Rahul
on the next day at 8.30 a.m.. However, the prosecution case cannot
be thrown out only on this stray statement when there is contrary
CDR available on record. Thus, all this evidence shows that the
victim “R” was kept in that particular flat. She was taken away
from her house by the accused No.3 Santosh and was kept in the
flat occupied by the accused No.1 Rahul. Thus, there is a direct
connection of accused Nos.1 & 3. The evidence of witnesses shows
that the accused No.2 Jishan was seen with the accused No.1
Rahul at various points, as discussed above.
53.
As submitted by all the learned counsel for the
respective accused and the learned APP, PW-25 Vivek Tiwari is the
63 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 64 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
most important witness for the prosecution. We have carefully
considered his evidence. He has given details of the torture faced
by “R”. His evidence shows that “R” was in a totally helpless
situation. She had left her family. She was kept in the flat but the
accused wanted to get rid of her. She did not want to go to a village
in Uttar Pradesh. She was desperately seeking help from PW-25.
The statement made by her to this witness PW-25 Vivek Tiwari is
admissible under Sub-section 1 of Section 32 of the Indian
Evidence Act. Sub-section 1 of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence
Act reads thus :
“ 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person
who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant. ––
Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made
by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or
who has become incapable of giving evidence, or
whose attendance cannot be procured without an
amount of delay or expense which under the
circumstances of the case appears to the Court
unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the
following cases: ––
(1) When it relates to cause of death.––When the
statement is made by a person as to the cause of
his death, or as to any of the circumstances of
the transaction which resulted in his death, in
cases in which the cause of that person’s death
comes into question.
Such statements are relevant
whether the person who made them was or was
not, at the time when they were made, under
64 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 65 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
expectation of death, and whatever may be the
nature of the proceeding in which the cause of
his death comes into question.
xxxx
xxxx”
54.
“R’s” statement was relevant and hence admissible
though at that point of time she was not under expectation of
death. Her statement is admissible not only regarding her cause of
death but also to any of the circumstances of the transaction which
resulted in her death. Such statement is relevant in the trial in
which cause of her death came into question. Therefore, her
statement to PW-25 Vivek Tiwari was relevant and admissible
under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act. Considering the
importance of her statement, her statement needs to be
reproduced, as stated by PW-25 Vivek Tiwari. It is as follows :
“She told me Santosh came, he slept with her at night, he
also gave her sexual trouble. Sexual trouble means he
raped. She told me Rahul and Zishan also done same thing
as Santosh did with her. He also torn her clothes.
Thereafter, she told Santosh asked her to go village.
However, she was not willing to go village. Thereafter, she
told me that Santosh made phone call to her that Rahul and
Zishan will come to the railway station and he will stay
there. Thereafter she told Rahul torn her clothes and she
needs new clothes.”
65 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 66 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
55.
In the present case, commission of sexual assault was
followed by her murder. It forms the same chain of transaction and
hence it is relevant and admissible. It is also corroborated by other
circumstances. PW-25 Vivek Tiwari had deposed that he had given
a SIM card to her so that she could communicate with him. She
had kept it concealed and was using it whenever she could.
Ultimately it is the same SIM card that led to discovery of the
offence and the offenders. The same SIM card was found
concealed in her underwear. As mentioned earlier, this witness was
in a close relationship with “R”. According to him, he had identified
all the accused. Not only that, as mentioned earlier, his statement
before the Magistrate also shows that he was knowing them as he
had told her that all the three accused had passed from in front of
him.
56.
The other important circumstance is about finding of
the nylon rope and a knife in the house of the accused No.1 Rahul
at his instance. This is an important piece of circumstance. The
nylon rope which was used for tying the hands of the dead body
was found from the bag recovered at Talegaon Railway Station.
The said rope and the pieces of nylon rope found at the instance of
66 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 67 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
the accused No.1 Rahul were sent for forensic examination and the
report showed that they matched with each other. Thus, the rope
which was used in tying the dead body was used by the accused
No.1 Rahul. The knife and the remaining pieces of the rope were
found in his flat at his instance. According to the prosecution case,
the murder was committed by strangulating her with her odhani,
which is supported by the evidence of the Medical officer.
57.
Another important aspect about this recovery is that on
11.5.2015 a receipt for purchasing that red trolly bag was found
from a small bag kept in the house of the accused No.1. Learned
counsel for the accused No.1 Rahul submitted that the timings of
the panchnamas did not match. However, we are unable to accept
that submission. The memorandum panchnama was completed at
Pune at around 2.30 p.m. on 10.5.2014 and from that point
onwards the next panchnama started and, therefore, the time of
the next panchnama is immediately after completion of recording
of memorandum panchnama. It cannot be said that the
panchnama should have started after the police and the panchas
had reached Nalasopara from Pune. The evidence of the
investigating officer shows that till about 10.50 p.m. in the night
67 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 68 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
they were in the flat of the accused No.1 to effect recovery.
Obviously it was quite late. After that the accused No.1 was kept in
the lock-up at Nalasopara police station and only on the next
morning they again visited the same flat when the other articles
including the ATM cards, passbooks and more importantly a receipt
of purchasing the trolly bag was recovered. We do not see any
unusual aspect in conducting seizure panchnama on the next day
when the procedure was incomplete on 10.5.2014. It was
completed only on the next day. Therefore, it cannot be said
certain articles were planted on the next day.
58.
One more important witness in this case is PW-6
Laxman Hajare. He has clearly stated as to how the accused No.3
Santosh approached him for fixing the fare and as to how the
accused Nos.1 & 2 alone travelled with him from Dadar to Pune.
He has identified all of them not only in the test identification
parade but also in the Court. This witness had spent sufficient time
with all the three accused to enable him to identify all of them.
59.
Learned counsel for the accused No.3 tried to show the
flaw in the test identification parade by submitting that three of the
dummies were also in the second round when PW-6 Laxman Hajare
68 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 69 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
had identified the accused No.3 Santosh. However, no such
questions were put to PW-6 Laxman Hajare and PW-21 Tahsildar
Lejindra Bobade on this aspect. The Tahsildar had brought three
different dummies and in all six dummies had stood in the second
round. In any case there is substantive evidence of identification of
all the three accused in the Court by these important witnesses.
60.
Though we have discussed that the evidence of the taxi
driver who had carried the accused Nos.1 & 2 from Nalasopara to
Dadar may not be useful to the prosecution case because the
accused were shown to him before the identification parade, there
is still evidence of the driver who had taken the accused Nos.1 & 2
from Urse Toll Naka to Mumbai. His evidence has stood firm. As
mentioned earlier, the prosecution has connected the phone
numbers of all the three accused through IMEI numbers of the
mobile handsets recovered and seized from them at the time of
their arrest. According to the prosecution case, the IMEI number of
the mobile handset found from the accused No.1 Rahul was
“359320/04/230606/7”. It corresponded to the mobile phone
number “9665184135”.
69 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 70 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
The IMEI number of the mobile handset seized from the
accused No.2 Jishan was “351960057273229”. It had a double SIM
card and, therefore, the other IMEI number was
“351960057273237”. His first IMEI number corresponded to the
mobile SIM card No.7709808065. The IMEI number of the mobile
handset seized from the accused No.3 Santosh was
“359364/05/375229/8”. It corresponded to mobile SIM card
No.9022074774.
61.
In this context, the evidence of PW-24 Chetan Patil the
Nodal Officer is important. He has given details about analysis of
those CDR. The location of the mobile phone numbers of both the
accused Nos.1 & 2 matched with the prosecution case of them
travelling from Mumbai to Pune. Before that they had travelled
from Nalasopara to Dadar which was in the Mumbai circle.
Similarly the prosecution has proved their travel to Pune and back.
The evidence of the taxi driver PW-6 Laxman Hajare shows that the
accused Nos.1 & 2 had travelled to Pune but his taxi was hired by
the accused No.3 Santosh. It was in the early hours. The connection
of all these accused is established. This has to be read with the
statements given by the deceased to PW-25 Vivek Tiwari involving
70 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 71 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
all the three accused.
62.
The evidence further shows that the evidence of PW-16
Imtiyaz Ansari showed that the accused Nos.1 & 2 returned to
Mumbai without that bag. Therefore, they travelled to Pune with
the bag, and they travelled back to Mumbai without the bag and
that bag was found at Talegaon Railway Station. Thus, the
accused Nos.1 & 2 abandoning the bag at Talegaon Railway
Station was sufficiently proved. As mentioned earlier, that bag was
identified by all the relevant witnesses. The dead body was found
from the bag. Hence, the prosecution has established all the
circumstances leading to murder, leaving the dead body in the bag,
recovery of the bag and tracing of the accused.
63.
The next question is whether the prosecution has
proved that it was a case of murder or it was a case of gang rape
with murder. A s we have discussed earlier, the medical evidence shows
that “R” was subjected to violent penetrative sexual assault. The deceased
as having committed rape
“R” herself had named all the three accused
on her. Section 376-D, which was introduced on 2.4.2013(w.e.f.
3.2.2013), gives definition of gang rape as follows :
71 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 72 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
“ 376D. Gang rape.-- Where a woman is raped by one or more
persons constituting a group or acting in furtherance of a
common intention, each of those persons shall be deemed
to have committed the offence of rape and shall be
punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend
to life which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder
of that person's natural life, and with fine:
Provided that such fine shall be just and
reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation
of the victim:
Provided further that any fine imposed under
this section shall be paid to the victim.”
. Before that, the term “gang rape” was mentioned in
Section 376(2)(g), as is stood before the 2013 amendment.
Explanation 1 explaining “gang rape” was similar. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court had explained the ingredients of “gang rape” in the
1
case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Hemraj and another . Paragraph-8 of the
said judgment reads thus:
“8. A bare reading of Section 375 makes the position clear that rape can
be committed only by a man. The section itself provides as to when
a man can be said to have committed rape. Section 376(2) makes
certain categories of serious cases of rape as enumerated therein
attract more severe punishment. One of them relates to "gang rape".
The language of Sub-section (2)(g) provides that whoever commits
`gang rape’ shall be punished etc. The Explanation only clarifies
that when a woman is raped by one or more in a group of persons
acting in furtherance of their common intention each such person
shall be deemed to have committed gang rape within this Sub-
section (2). That cannot make a woman guilty of committing rape.
1 (2009) 12 SCC 403
72 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 73 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
This is conceptually inconceivable. The Explanation only indicates
that when one or more persons act in furtherance of their common
intention to rape a woman, each person of the group shall be
deemed to have committed gang rape. By operation of the deeming
provision, a person who has not actually committed rape is deemed
to have committed rape even if only one of the group in furtherance
of the common intention has committed rape. "Common intention"
is dealt with in Section 34 IPC and provides that when a criminal
act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common
intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the
same manner as if it was done by him alone. "Common intention"
denotes action in concert and necessarily postulates a pre- arranged
plan, a prior meeting of minds and an element of participation in
action. The acts may be different and vary in character, but must be
actuated by the same common intention, which is different from
same intention or similar intention. The sine qua non for bringing in
application of Section 34 IPC that the act must be done in
furtherance of the common intention to do a criminal act. The
expression "in furtherance of their common intention" as appearing
in the Explanation to Section 376(2) relates to intention to commit
rape. A woman cannot be said to have an intention to commit rape.
Therefore, the counsel for the appellant is right in her submission
that the appellant cannot be prosecuted for alleged commission of
the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g).”
. The same observations are applicable to the definition
of “gang rape” given under Section 376D of IPC (after it was
introduced in the year 2013). Thus, applying the provisions and the
definition of “gang rape” it can be seen that each of the three
accused can be said to have committed the offence under Section
376D of IPC. The prosecution has proved that “R” was murdered
by strangulation with the help of odhani. Therefore, the conviction
73 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 74 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
recorded by the trial Court cannot be faulted with.
64.
We have also heard the learned counsel for the accused
as well as learned APP for the State on the question of the sentence
imposed by the trial Court. Learned counsel Shri Vagal submitted
that it was not within the powers of the learned Sessions Judge to
have sentenced the accused for the remainder of their natural life
while imposing the sentence of life imprisonment under Section
302 of IPC. We have considered these submissions and we agree
with that submission. The same view is taken by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the following two cases :
2
[i] Ravinder Singh Vs. State Government of NCT of Delhi
3
[ii] Gauri Shankar Vs. State of Punjab
. However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explained the
power of the High Court to sentence such offenders for punishment
upto the remainder of his natural life. In the case of Gauri Shankar ,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court had observed that the trial Court has no
such power to look at the circumstances confirming the sentence of
imprisonment for life to mean the remainder of natural life while
upholding the conviction under Section 302 of IPC. The relevant
observation in paragraph 15 of the said judgment is as follows:
2 (2024) 2 SCC 323
3 (2021) 3 SCC 380
74 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 75 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
“It is true that the punishment of remainder of natural life could not
have been imposed by the learned trial Judge but after looking into
the entire case, we consider it appropriate to confirm the sentence
of imprisonment for life to mean the remainder of natural life while
upholding the conviction under Section 302 of IPC.”
65.
As far as Section 376D of IPC is concerned, the learned
trial Judge was well within his powers to sentence all the accused
for life imprisonment to mean remainder of their natural life.
66.
We have seriously considered the aspect of sentencing;
and we have heard the parties. All of them submitted that leniency
be shown to them and all of them be sentenced to a lesser
sentence. However, no special reasons were pointed out to justify
why leniency be shown. Section 376D of IPC provides for
minimum sentence of twenty years which could extend to life
imprisonment which was to mean imprisonment for remainder of
that person’s natural life. We have considered these submissions
seriously. We have also perused the reasons recorded by the learned
trial Judge in imposing the sentence for the remainder of their
natural life.
67.
We have already noted the brutal manner in which the
victim “R” was subjected to forcible sexual assault. She was a
helpless fifteen year old girl kept against her wish in that flat. She
75 of 76
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::
: 76 : 901--APEAL-976-1165-2023-976-2024J.odt
had no where to go. The accused were forcing her to go to Uttar
Pradesh. When she resisted, they committed her murder in the
most brutal manner. The medical evidence shows that her head was
banged. Her dead body was kept in a bag. Her injuries were
antemortem. Her spine was fractured. All this shows that the
offence was committed in the most brutal manner. The offence was
committed in cold blood with pre-planning. She was subjected to
extreme physical and mental torture. She was a minor. The offence
shows extreme depravity on the part of the accused.
68.
In this view of the matter, it is not possible to show any
leniency to any of the accused. With the result, we do not find it
necessary to reduce the sentence. Though the learned Judge could
not have sentenced the Appellants to suffer imprisonment for life
i.e. natural life, the High Court can impose life imprisonment to
mean imprisonment for remainder of natural life. As a result, we do
not see any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and
order. Accordingly, the Appeals are dismissed. With dismissal of the
Appeals, the connected Interim Applications are also disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
76 of 76
Digitally signed
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRAKASHRAO
DESHMANE
Date:
2026.02.26
19:07:50
+0530
PRADIPKUMAR
PRAKASHRAO
DESHMANE
::: Uploaded on - 26/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 26/02/2026 19:48:05 :::