Full Judgment Text
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.169 OF 2013
Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil,
Age: 29 Years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o. Jam Mohalla, Bhusawal,
Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon. APPELLANT
[Orig.Accused No.3]
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.263 OF 2013
Kadir Yakub Gawali,
Age: 25 years, Occupation Nil,
R/o.Bhusawal, Taluka Bhusawal,
District Jalgaon. APPELLANT
[Orig.Accused No.2]
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra,
Through P.I. Bazarpeth
Police Station, Bhusawal.
RESPONDENT
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.430 OF 2013
Mohammad Nadeem Abdul Rashid Bagwan,
Age 32 yrs, Occ. Nil,
R/o. Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal,
Dist. Jalgaon. APPELLANT
[Orig.Accused No.1]
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
Through P.I. Bazarpeth,
Police Station, Bhusawal. RESPONDENT
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
2
...
Mr.N.S.Ghanekar, Advocate for appellant in
Criminal Appeal No.169/2013
Mr.V.D.Sapkal, Advocate for appellant in
Criminal Appeal No.263/2013
Mr.V.B.Jagtap [Appointed], Advocate for
appellant in Criminal Appeal No.430/2013.
Ms. Preeti V. Diggikar, APP for the
Respondent / State.
...
CORAM: S.S.SHINDE &
K.K.SONAWANE,JJ.
Reserved on : 04.01.2017
Pronounced on : 10.01.2017
JUDGMENT: (Per S.S.Shinde, J.):
1. All these three Criminal Appeals are
arising out of the judgment and order dated
th
30 March, 2013 passed by the Sessions Judge,
Jalgaon in Sessions Case No.187 of 2009,
thereby convicting the appellants for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 324
r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore,
these Appeals are heard together and being
disposed of by the common judgment and order.
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
3
2. The prosecution case in nutshell is
as under:
It is the case of the prosecution
that on 10.08.2009 in the morning Kesharlal
Pralhad Patil and Mukesh had been to Shirpur
for admission of Mukesh in Engineering
College. Pankaj was on duty at Jalgaon from
3.00 p.m. to 12.00 p.m. After work of
admission at Shirpur was over, Kesharlal and
Mukesh came to Amalner by bus. From Amalner
they boarded SuratBhusawal Passenger train
to come to Bhusawal. Pankaj joined them in
the same train at Jalgaon at around 1.15 a.m.
Trio reached Bhusawal Railway Station at
around 2.10 a.m.
3. On getting down at Railway Station,
Bhusawal, Pankaj started on foot ahead and
Kesharlal and Mukesh were behind on bicycle.
They were proceeding towards their house. At
around 2.30 a.m., Pankaj was passing through
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
4
the road in front of Shalimar Hotel near
Amardeep Talkies in Jam Mohalla at Bhusawal.
That time 56 persons sitting on Ota of
Shalimar Hotel called Pankaj. He did not
respond. It is contended that one of them
abused Pankaj and asked him to stop. Then
Pankaj stopped. Those persons called Pankaj
so he went to them. One of those persons was
tall, fair and wearing yellow shirt. He
enquired from Pankaj which train has arrived.
In reply, Pankaj stated it was a Surat
Passenger. Those persons asked Pankaj where
is he going. Pankaj told them that he is
going to home. By that time, Kesharlal and
Mukesh, who were behind on bicycle reached
there. They got down from bicycle and then
trio started walking so as to go to their
home.
4. It is alleged that those 56 persons
were in drunken condition and they hurled
abuses to Kesharlal and his sons. But
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
5
ignoring abuses, Kesharlal, Pankaj and Mukesh
walked ahead. Those persons followed them
till Amardeep square. At Amardeep Square one
of them gave slap to Pankaj on his head from
back and others too started beating Pankaj.
Kesharlal and Mukesh tried to intervene and
save Pankaj. That time a person in yellow
shirt caught hold neck of Pankaj while
another gave a blow with knife at the abdomen
of Kesharlal. Kesharlal fell down. When
Mukesh tried to hold his father, he was
assaulted with knife by that person on his
left shoulder. Pankaj raised alarm. As people
started assembling, accused persons fled
away. According to prosecution witnesses,
they must be in the age group between 2030
years.
5. Pankaj then called his cousin Deepak
Pundlik Patil on mobile. Within few minutes,
Deepak Patil along with his father Pundlik
Nath Patil arrived on the spot. Kesharlal was
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
6
lying in a pool of blood. He was taken to the
Hospital of Dr.Santosh Chaudhari by Deepak
and his father on motorcycle. Pankaj and
Mukesh followed them on bicycle. From the
Hospital of Dr.Santosh Chaudhari, Kesharlal
was taken to Municipal Dispensary Bhusawal
where he was declared as dead.
6. On 11.08.2009 at 3.15 a.m. Pankaj
lodged report with Bazarpeth Police Station
Bhusawal. Crime No.136/2009 was registered
for the offences punishable under Sections
302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323 and 504 of
the Indian Penal Code.
7. After registration of FIR by Pankaj,
the investigation was set in motion, and
thereafter after investigation was complete,
chargesheet came to be filed. The appellants
were tried and stands convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 324
r/w.34 of the I.P. Code. Hence these Appeals.
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
7
8. The learned Advocate Mr.V.D.Sapkal
appearing for the appellant namely Kadir
Yakub Gawali in Criminal Appeal No.263/2013
submits that, the identification parade
before the Court, after one year from the
date of incident, could not have been
believed by the trial Court. It is submitted
that the identification parade which was
carried out before the concerned Authority
suffered from inherent procedural defects and
also the same was of no use since the
photographs of the accused were already
published in the leading news paper published
at Bhusawal, prior to conducting the
identification parade by the Tahsildar. It is
submitted that, in the said identification
parade before the Tahsildar, the appellant
namely Kadir Yakub Gawali was not identified
by PW2Mukesh Kesharlal Patil. He submits
that, there is no any other independent
evidence which lends support to the version
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
8
of Pankaj Kesharlal Patil (PW1) and Mukesh
(PW2). It is submitted that the prosecution
has not brought on record the evidence which
would indicate that the accused had any
motive/reason to commit the alleged offences
in question. It is submitted that, since the
accused were not known to the prosecution
witnesses the identification parade assumes
importance and in the facts of the present
case the identification parade which was
carried out before the Tahsildar was
disbelieved by the trial Court. It is
submitted that the evidence of PW1 Pankaj
and PW2 Mukesh suffers from inherent
contradictions, omissions and improvements.
In support of his contention that in absence
of proper identification parade and
identification of the accused first time in
the Court, the benefit of doubt ought to have
been given to the appellant, pressed into
service the judgment of the Supreme Court in
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
9
1
the case of Girdhar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
in particular para 8 thereof.
9. The learned Advocate Mr.
N.S.Ghanekar appearing for the appellant
namely Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil in
Criminal Appeal No.169 of 2013 in addition to
the arguments advanced by the learned
Advocate Mr. V.D.Sapkal submits that, once
the identification parade before the
Tahsildar was disbelieved by the trial Court
on the ground that the said identification
parade was not in accordance with the
procedure/rules and also the photographs of
the accused were already published in the
news paper, the identification parade before
the Tahsildar or an identification of the
accused before the court by the Pankaj (PW1)
and Mukesh (PW2), cannot be believed. He
submits that, since there was no any
motive/intention to commit the alleged
1 2012 AIR SCW 425
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
10
offences, the benefit of doubt deserves to be
given to the appellant.
10. The learned Advocate Mr.Vijay B.
Jagtap [Appointed], appearing for the
appellant namely Mohammad Nadeem Abdul Rashid
Bagwan in Criminal Appeal No.430 of 2013
submits that, the Medical Officer has not
firmly stated that the death of Kesharlal was
homicidal. In fact, the injuries sustained by
the deceased Kesharlal was due to accidental
cause. He submits that, in absence of
identification parade of the accused and
weapons used, the benefit of doubt should
have been given to the appellant. He submits
that, the prosecution has utterly failed to
bring on record any motive for commission of
offences by the appellant. Therefore, he
submits that, the Appeal filed by the
appellant deserves to be allowed.
Without prejudice to the arguments
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
11
already advanced, the learned counsel by way
of alternate submission argued that, there
was no motive for commission of offences. At
the most it can be said that, appellant in
the heat of anger in sudden provocation
appears to have committed the alleged
offences, and therefore, the sentence for the
offence punishable under Section 302 of the
appellant be modified and may be brought down
under Section 304 (II) of the Indian Penal
Code.
11. It appears that, the prosecution did
examine as many as 12 witnesses. However, the
evidence of Pankaj (PW1) and Mukesh (PW2)
assumes importance inasmuch as they are eye
witnesses to the incident. It clearly emerges
from the evidence available on record that,
th
the alleged incident had taken place on 11
August, 2009 at about 2.30 a.m. Immediately
thereafter Pankaj lodged report with
Bazarpeth Police Station, Bhusawal and the
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
12
FIR came to be registered. It further appears
that the injured Mukesh was treated at
Bhusawal Municipal Dispensary immediately
after the incident and the Medical Officer
noticed contused lacerated wound on left
upper arm and on left scapular region on back
of Mukesh. Therefore, the presence of Mukesh
at the time of incident is proved by the
prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. Pankaj
was also assaulted by the accused.
12. It appears that even the spot
panchanama was immediately drawn between 3.35
a.m. to 4.20 a.m. in the presence of panchas
namely Pradeep Madhukar Sutar and Ravindra
Jagannath Dhage. Immediately on 11.08.2009 at
about 6.20 a.m. the accused no.1 Mohammad
Nadeem Abdul Rashid Bagwan and accused no.2
Kadir Yakub Gawali were arrested. Therefore,
there is no manner of doubt that there was
prompt lodging of FIR, carrying out the spot
panchanama referring the Pankaj to the
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
13
medical examination. Kesharlal Pralhad Patil
(deceased) was immediately taken to the
Hospital after the incident, but he was
declared as dead and his post mortem was
conducted between 7.10 a.m. to 8.10 a.m.
13. Medical Officer Dr.Ajay Bajirao
Sonowane (PW8) stated in his deposition
before the Court that, on external
examination he found that stab wound of size
9 cm x 5 cm over the epigastric region on
anterior abdominal wall just 10 cm from
umbilical site. Depth of wound was up to 5 cm
extended up to peritoneal region. Stab wound
was present over the right neck side over the
carotid triangle. Size of the stab wound was
6 cm x 3 cm. Its depth was upto 15 cm. These
were cut sharp injuries. Edges were sharp.
Injuries were grievous in nature. Both the
stab wounds were antemortem. After external
examination, he started post mortem. During
internal examination, he found first stab
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
14
wound up to peritoneum region. No internal
abdominal bleeding was found. The depth of
second wound shows rupture of carotid artery
and jugular vein showing internal
haemorrhage. He opined that, probable cause
of death is due to haemorrhage and shock due
to stab injuries. Both the injuries stated by
him are possible with a sharp knife. Death is
possible due to these injuries. Upon careful
perusal of his cross examination, his version
in examination in chief remained unshattered.
Therefore, the prosecution has proved beyond
reasonable doubt that death of Kesharlal was
homicidal.
14. Pankaj Kesharlal Patil (PW1) in his
evidence stated that, his brother had passed
th
12 standard. He was selected at Engineering
College Shirpur. His father and brother had
been to Shirpur on 10.08.2009. On that day,
he was on duty from 3.00 p.m. to 12.00 p.m.
After attending duty, he came to Jalgaon
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
15
Railway Station. His father and brother were
coming by AmalnerBhusawal passenger. They
met him at Jalgaon Railway Station on
11.08.2009 at 1.10 hours. After getting down
at Bhusawal Railway Station, he was
proceeding to his home. Followed by his
father and brother on bicycle behind him.
When he was going by Amardeep Talkies through
Jam Mohalla, he noticed that near Shalimar
Talkies 56 persons were sitting on the Ota /
Platform. One of the accused Shaikh Shakil
asked him to stop. He did not stop. Said
Shakil abused him. He stopped him between
2.15 to 2.30 hours. A tall boy with Yellow
Shirt asked him ‘ dkSulh xkMh vk;h] dgkWa tk jgk
gS ’ (about the name of train arrived and where
are you going), he stated that he came by
Surat passenger and he is going to his home.
His father and brother then arrived there. He
further stated that those 56 persons were
under the influence of liquor. He himself,
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
16
his father and brother reached at Amardeep
Talkies square. The accused persons were
abusing them from behind. They ignored it.
Then Kadir Gawali slapped on back of his
head. While he was beating him, other accused
also came there and they started beating him.
His father–Kesharlal came to save him. Shaikh
Shakil caught hold his neck. When his father
was coming to save him, Nadim inflicted knife
blow on the stomach of his father. He could
rescue himself. When his brother intervened
to save his father, Nadim had given a knife
blow on his brother’s left shoulder. They
raised cries then accused started running.
He called his cousin Deepak Pundlik Patil on
mobile and Deepak came there by twowheeler.
His father was taken to the Hospital of
Dr.Santoch Chaudhari on the said twowheeler.
However, his father was declared as dead by
the said Doctor and then his father was taken
to the Municipal Hospital. He also stated
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
17
details about the registration of FIR and
seizure of clothes of deceased. He further
stated that on 18.08.2009, he was called for
identification parade at tahsil office,
Bhusawal. He stated details about the manner
in which the identification parade was
carried out. It appears from his evidence
that, he identified the present appellants as
assailants in identification parade before
the Tahsildar and also before the Court.
15. During his cross examination, he
stated that, police caught some suspects,
they were shown to him in between 4.00 to
5.00 a.m., but they were not accused persons.
When suggestion was given to him, whether he
had seen accused on BCL Channel or the
photographs of the accused on news paper, he
denied the said suggestion. Be that as it
may, the said identification parade before
the Tahsildar was not believed by the trial
Court for the reasons which are assigned in
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
18
the impugned judgment. It appears from the
evidence of Pankaj (PW1) that, there was no
any specific reason or motive for commission
of offence by the accused persons. It appears
from his evidence that, the accused were of
the age group between 25 to 30 years. The
entire beginning or starting point of episode
as appearing in his evidence is that, near
Shalimar Talkies 56 persons were sitting on
the Ota/Platform. Out of 56 accused persons,
one of the accused namely Shaikh Shakil told
him ‘ :[k ’ (Stop). He did not stop and then
accused started abusing him and accused
stopped him in between 2.15 to 2.30 hours.
It further appears that a tall boy out of 56
accused persons asked him about the name of
train and where PW1 is going.
16. It is further stated by Pankaj (PW1)
that his father and brother arrived there.
Upon reading the evidence of Pankaj (PW1), it
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
19
clearly emerges that, the prosecution did not
bring on record the evidence showing that as
a matter of fact other accused knew that,
Nadim was possessing knife and he is likely
to use the said knife in the commission of
offence. It appears that, Nadim inflicted
knife blow in the stomach of Kesharlal and
also when the brother of Pankaj (PW1) i.e.
another witness Mukesh (PW2) intervened to
save his father, Nadim had given a knife blow
on the hand of Mukesh (PW2). Mukesh (PW2)
sustained injuries on his shoulder due to
said assault by the Nadim.
17. Mukesh (PW2) in his deposition
stated that, on 10.08.2009 he himself and his
father had been to Shirpur for his admission.
On that day, his brother i.e. Pankaj (PW1)
was on duty at Jalgaon from 3.00 p.m. to
12.00 p.m. Their train reached to Jalgaon at
1.00 a.m. to 1.25 a.m., that time they met
his brother Pankaj (PW1) in the train. Then
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
20
they three started for Bhusawal. They reached
Bhusawal at 2.00 to 2.15 a.m. on 11.08.2009.
They got down at the station. His father had
kept bicycle at R.P.F. office. His brother
Pankaj (PW1) told them that, both i.e. Mukesh
and Kesharlal can come by bicycle, and Pankaj
(PW1) started proceeding to their home. His
father took bicycle from R.P.F.office. His
brother was walking ahead. He started riding
bicycle. His father was sitting behind. They
reached near Shalimar Hotel. They saw that,
56 persons had stopped his brother Pankaj
near Shalimar Hotel. They went close to his
brother. 56 persons were abusing his
brother. He asked his brother what happened?
Pankaj (PW1) replied that, these persons are
abusing him. However, they ignored abuses and
went ahead.
18. When they were going ahead, his
brother Pankaj (PW1) informed them that,
those 56 persons were sitting near Shalimar
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
21
Hotel. He stated that, a tall and fair person
asked him come here ( b/kj vko ). However, Pankaj
ignored their call and then accused started
abusing him. Then Pankaj stopped. Then 56
persons asked Pankaj by which train he has
arrived and where he is going.
Mukesh (PW2) further stated in his
deposition that, he was slowly riding
bicycle. His father was pillion rider. His
brother was on foot. They reached near
Amardeep Talkies. That time Kadir Gawali
slapped on the back of head of Pankaj. Then
he along with his father got down from
bicycle. Put bicycle on stand and went to
rescue his brother. Accused Sk. Shakil a fair
and tall boy caught neck of his brother
Pankaj (PW1). That time Sk.Shakil was wearing
yellow shirt. They tried to rescue his
brother but they could not rescue him, that
time Nadim assaulted his father on stomach by
knife. He tried to rescue his father. That
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
22
time, Nadim gave knife blows on his left hand
and back. With the same knife, he gave blow
on the neck of his father. He himself and his
father sustained injuries and there was
oozing of blood. He made his father lie on
the floor. Then he himself and his brother
shouted. People assembled there. Then they
fled away from the said place. He called his
cousin and his uncle. They arrived at the
place of incident.
19. If the evidence of Pankaj (PW1) and
Mukesh (PW2) is considered in its entirety,
the genesis or starting point of the incident
is one of the accused namely Shaikh Shakil
asked Pankaj (PW1) to stop. Pankaj (PW1) did
not stop, then accused started abusing him.
As already observed, it has not come on
record that, they had any particular motive
or object for commission of offence. It
clearly emerges that, the father of Pankaj
(PW1) and Mukesh (PW2) got down from the
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
23
bicycle and went to rescue Pankaj (PW1). When
he went to rescue Pankaj (PW1), that time
Nadim assaulted Kesharlal on the stomach with
a knife blow and when Mukesh (PW2) tried to
rescue Kesharlal, Nadim gave knife blows to
Mukesh (PW2) and again knife blow on neck of
Kesharlal. Therefore, it can safely be
concluded that, Nadim gave knife blow not
only to Kesharlal but also to Mukesh, had
intention to kill Kesharlal. The fact that he
had given more than one knife blows on the
neck and stomach of Kesharlal is sufficient
to hold that the accused / appellant Nadim is
rightly held guilty of offence punishable
under Section 302, 324 r/w.34 of the Indian
Penal Code by the trial Court for the murder
of Kesharlal and also for inflicting knife
injuries on Mukesh (PW2).
20. It is true that, the identification
parade, which was conducted before the
Tahsildar, has been disbelieved by the trial
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
24
Court, though Pankaj (PW1) identified all
three appellants in the said identification
parade and Mukesh (PW2) was able to identify
two appellants accused. Be that as it may,
Pankaj (PW1) and Mukesh (PW2) identified all
three accused before the Court. The
submission of the learned counsel appearing
for the appellants that, such identification
parade before the Court, that too, after one
year from the date of incident deserves to be
discarded has no substance in the peculiar
facts of this case. Pankaj (PW1) and Mukesh
(PW2) had ample opportunity to clearly notice
the appearances and physical features of the
accused as there was sufficient light. Since
the incident had taken place on public road
for considerable period, we are not prepared
to accept the submission of the learned
counsel appearing for the appellants that,
such identification parade before the Court
should not be believed. In the present case,
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
25
Pankaj (PW1) and Mukesh (PW2) had opportunity
to witness the entire incident and their
evidence corroborates each other. Apart from
that, there is evidence of Medical Officer
wherein it is clearly stated that the death
of Kesharlal was homicidal and caused due to
injuries inflicted by knife by Nadim. At this
juncture, it would be apt to refer the
authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme
Court in the case of S Vs. Sunil Kumar and
2
another , the Supreme Court while reversing
acquittal of the respondent therein held in
para 11 that:
“11. It has consistently been
held by this Court that what is
substantive evidence is the
identification of an accused in
court by a witness and that the
prior identification in a test
identification parade is used only
to corroborate the identification in
court. Holding of test
2 (2015) 8 SCC 478
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
26
identification parade is not the
rule of law but rule of prudence.
Normally identification of the
accused in a test identification
parade lends assurance so that the
subsequent identification in court
during trial could be safely relied
upon. However, even in the absence
of such test identification parade,
the identification in court can in
given circumstances be relied upon,
if the witness is otherwise
trustworthy and reliable. The law on
the point is well settled and
succinctly laid down in Ashok
Debbarma.”
21. In that view of the matter, in our
considered view the identification of the
appellants by the Pankaj (PW1) and Mukesh
(PW2) in the Court has been rightly
considered and believed by the trial Court.
22. So far other accused are concerned,
in the light of evidence brought on record by
the prosecution, it can not be safely
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
27
concluded that the prosecution has proved
beyond reasonable doubt that, accused namely
Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil and Kadir Yakub
Gawali were sharing common intention to kill
Kesharlal or inflicted injuries / assaulted
Mukesh (PW2) by any weapon. It is also not
the case of the prosecution that, accused
namely Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil and Kadir
Yakub Gawali were holding/possessing any
weapon. However, the fact remains that, one
of the aforesaid accused gave slap to Pankaj
and another accused caught hold his neck. As
already observed, though accused namely
Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil and Kadir Yakub
Gawali cannot be held guilty for the offences
punishable under Section 302, 324 r/w. 34 of
the Indian Penal Code nevertheless since one
of the accused gave slap and another accused
caught hold his neck, they are liable to be
convicted for the lesser offence punishable
under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
28
23. In the light of discussion in the
foregoing paragraphs, in our considered view
the prosecution has not brought on record
sufficient evidence / circumstances which
would unequivocally and beyond reasonable
doubt would establish that, the accused
appellant namely Shaikh Shakil Shaikh Khalil
in Criminal Appeal No.169/2013 and appellant
namely Kadir Yakub Gawali in Criminal Appeal
No.263/2013 were sharing common intention
with Mohammad Nadeem Abdul Rashid Bagwan to
kill Kesharlal or to assault/inflict stab
injuries to Mukesh (PW2).
24. In that view of the matter, so far
conviction of the appellant namely Shaikh
Shakil Shaikh Khalil in Criminal Appeal
No.169/2013 and appellant namely Kadir Yakub
Gawali in Criminal Appeal No.263/2013 for the
offences punishable under Section 302 r/w.34
of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
suffer imprisonment for life and a fine of
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
29
Rs.5,000/ (Rupees Five Thousand) each, in
default each to suffer further rigorous
imprisonment for one year and for the offence
punishable under Section 324 r/w.34 and
sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
two year each, cannot sustain and the benefit
of doubt deserves to be given to them, and
accordingly, their conviction for the offence
punishable under Section 302 r/w.34 of the
Indian Penal Code and for the offence
punishable under Section 324 r/w. 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, stands quashed and set
aside and they stands acquitted from the said
offences.
25. However, conviction of appellant
namely Mohammad Nadeem Abdul Rashid Bagwan in
Criminal Appeal No.430/2013 for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to suffer
imprisonment for life and a fine of
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
30
Rs.5,000/ (Rupees Five Thousand), in default
to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for
one year and his conviction for the offence
punishable under Section 324 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for two year, stands confirmed.
26. Set off under Section 428 of the
Criminal Procedure Code be given to him as
already ordered by the trial Court.
27. In the light of discussion in the
foregoing paragraphs, appellant accused
no.2 namely Kadir Yakub Gawali and appellant
accused no.3 namely Shaikh Shakil Shaikh
Khalil are held guilty for the offence
punishable under Section 323 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for one year each. They were in
jail during trial and also subsequently they
are not released on bail, already they have
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::
169.2013Cri.Appeal+.odt
31
undergone more than 1 year sentence,
therefore they be released forthwith if not
required in any other case.
28. In the result, Criminal Appeal
No.430 of 2013 filed by Mohammad Nadeem Abdul
Rashid Bagwan is dismissed and Criminal
Appeal No.169 of 2013 and Criminal Appeal
No.263 of 2013 are partly allowed in above
terms.
Since Mr.V.B.Jagtap, the learned
counsel is appointed to prosecute the cause
of the appellant namely Mohammad Nadeem Abdul
Rashid Bagwan, we quantify his fees
Rs.7500/.
Sd/- Sd/-
[K.K.SONAWANE] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DDC
::: Uploaded on - 10/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 02/06/2024 02:54:50 :::