Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 955 of 2005
PETITIONER:
Ashok Laxman Gaikwad
RESPONDENT:
State of Maharashtra
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/04/2006
BENCH:
Dr. AR. Lakshmanan & D.K. Jain
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
ORDER
This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the High Court of
Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 1988 dated 16th June, 2004 dismissing
the appeal filed by the appellant/accused and thereby convicting the
appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to
suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant took us through the
entire evidence and the post mortem certificate and, in particular, the
evidence of the doctor. We have carefully perused the evidence adduced on
behalf of the respondent. We have perused the dying declaration given by
the deceased on 25th January, 1987 at 22.30 p.m. It is seen from the
remarks of the doctor that the patient, namely, the deceased was conscious
and was in a position to give the statement recorded by the Magistrate. It
is further seen from the above declaration that the deceased had love
affair with the accused and that she opposed the accused marrying for the
second time and that the accused on the fateful date pourded kerosene on
her person and with the help of burning match stick set fire on her, due to
which she received the burn injuries. It is clear from the dying
declaration that the accused poured kerosene on her person and with the
help of burning match stick set fire on her.
We have also perused the medical evidence given by Dr. Ramesh Namuaji
Bhange (P.W.6). It is seen from the doctor’s evidence that the deceased
disclosed the history to the doctor that the accused poured kerosene on her
body and set her on fire and that the judicial Magistrate has recorded the
dying declaration of the deceased. It is also seen from the doctor’s
evidence that before her statement was recorded by the Sub-Judicial
Magistrate he had examined her and found that she was conscious and in a
position to give the statement. Accordingly, the doctor has signed the
endorsement appearing on the dying declaration. He has also identified his
signature on the dying declaration. In cross examination nothing contrary
has been elicited to discredit the doctor’s evidence. The doctor has also
explained as to why he initially recorded the word ‘suicidal’ on the first
page of the case papers and when he found the initial statement was wrong,
he extracts the word ‘homicidal’ on the first page of the case papers. He
has also explained under that circumstance he has recorded the word
‘suicidal’. The doctor also denied the suggestion made to him that the
patient has not given him any history against the accused and it is also
not correct to say that the dying declaration was not recorded by the Sub-
Judicial Magistrate in his presence.
We have also persued the other evidence tendered by the prosecution which
in our view supports the case put forward by the prosecution. The learned
judges of the Division Bench has considered the entire evidence tendered on
behalf of the prosecution in its proper perspective and has come to the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
conclusion that the prosecution has clearly proved its case beyond
reasonable doubt. The reasons recorded by the learned Judges of the
Division Bench of the High Court is cogent and convincing. The learned
Judges have also affirmed the judgment rendered by the learned Sessions
Judge, Pune for the ample reasons recorded in their judgment. We have not
been persuaded to take a different view than the one taken by the Division
Bench of the High Court. The involvement of the accused in the offence
alleged has been clearly proved beyond any doubt. We have also no reason to
disbelieve the dying declaration given by the deceased and the evidence
tendered on the side of the prosecution. In our opinion, no case is made
out for interference by this Court with the well considered judgment of the
High court affirming the verdict of the learned Sessions Judge.
Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed.