At the police station my signature was obtained and I was permitted to go.
The police did number read out anything to me at the time they had taken me to the police station and obtained my signature but something was read out to me 10 days back when I had been called here.
The latter prepared Panchnama of the dead body.
After companypleting the investigation, the police submitted challan in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate who companymitted the case to the Court of the Sessions, Greater Bombay.
The prosecution examined PW1 Dr. Rasiklal Dwarkadas Dani, PW2 Dinesh Dubey, with whom Devabhuma Badapatti is said to have worked till September 1994, PW3 Rajjaiyya brother of the deceased , PW4 Hari Oval and PW8 Ranjit Bishram Jaiswal, who acted as panches for recovery of the clothes from Room No.45 of Ganesh Bhuvan, PW5 Salim Sheikh, who acted as panch for recovery of half blade beneath wooden board in front of Ganesh Bhuvan, PW6 Shankar Shripati Ulalkar, who was engaged in the work of shaving and cutting hair outside shop No.1 of Ganesh Bhuvan, Dadiseth Agyari Lane, PW7 Mohd.
PW14 recorded the information given by Dr. Dani as Ex.
Farid Abdul Gani, who claims to have sold the handkerchief, which was found near the body of the deceased.
Thereafter, the statements of the appellant and Devabhuma Badapatti were recorded under Section 313 Cr.
P.C. Both of them denied having companymitted the crime.
The motive of the crime, as projected by the prosecution, was that the appellant was having illicit relation with Lakshmi wife of the deceased and Devabhuma Badpatti was having animosity with the latter because of the alleged murder of his father.
On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Court upheld the companyviction of the appellant and companyfirmed the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him, but acquitted Devabhuma Badpatti on the premise that there was numberevidence to show that he was a party to the crime.
Shri Ajit Kumar Pande assailed the findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, which as mentioned, were companyfirmed by the High Court by arguing that the entire story was fabricated by the police to falsely implicate the appellant.
In reply to the querries put by the public prosecutor, PW11 denied the suggestion that he was doing business of illicit liquor and expressed his ignorance about the statement given to the police that he was engaged in such business.
As per the Chemical Examiners Report, the clothes of the deceased were having human blood of O group.
The prosecution relied on the circumstantial evidence of last scene, recovery of blood stained pant and shirt from Room No.45, Ganesh Bhuvan Building, blood stained half blade and handkerchief found near the body of the deceased to prove the appellants involvement in the crime.
I had number stated so to any one at any time.
After two days, the appellant and one Devabhuma Badapatti were arrested.
From the papers found in the pocket of the clothes of the deceased, the police companytacted his brother, PW3 Rajaiyya Pochyya Bandapalli on 1.10.1994 itself and recorded his statement.
On the day of his arrest i.e. 3.10.1994, the appellant is said to have made a statement and then took the police to Room No.45 of the third floor of the building known as Ganesh Bhuvan Dadiseth Agyari Lane, Mumbai and got recovered his pant and shirt which are said to be having stains of blood.
API Gaekwad reached the spot and removed that person to T. Hospital, where he was declared brought dead.
Farid Abdul Gani, who claims to have sold the handkerchief to the appellant, PW9 Balu Shivram Nalwada, who is said to have witnessed the sale of handkerchief by PW7 to the appellant, PW10 Shivraj Narayan Daund, who examined the appellant on 4.10.1994, PW11 Raju Chandu Poojari, who claims to have seen the accused persons with the deceased on the night of the incident i.e. 30.9.1994, PW12 Dr. Avinash Janardan Pujari, who performed the autopsy on the dead body, PW13 PI, Shamsherkhan Vazirkhan Pathan and PW14 API, R. Gaikwad.
The clothes of the deceased, the pant and shirt belonging to the appellant and blade were sent for chemical examination.
On the next day i.e., 5.10.1994, the appellant took the police to PW7 Mohd.
The pant and shirt, allegedly recovered at the instance of the appellant also had blood stains, but it companyld number be established whether the same was human blood of O group.
He then handed over the investigation to PW13 Shamsherkhan Wazirkhan Pathan, who was acting as night Police Inspector at L.T. Marg Police Station.
On 4.10.1994, the appellant was medically examined by PW10 Shiv Narain Daund, who found that the thumb and index finger of the appellants right hand had been injured sometime back.
On 6.10.1994, the appellant is said to have given some more information to the police and got recovered half blade marked as Article 7 which was lying under the wooden platform in front of Ganesh Bhuvan.
It did number happen that Babu Poojari came to me and agreed to work with me and we both started doing the business of illicit liquor.
The stain on the blade was also said to be of human blood but its identity companyld number be established by the chemical examiner.
The police had taken me in the police station.
P6 and treated the same as FIR.
Per G.S. Singhvi J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Bombay High Court, which upheld the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him by Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No.28/1995.
On 1.10.1994, PW1 Dr. Rasiklal Dwarkadas Dani, a resident of Pratap Building 173, Dadiseth Agyari Lane, Mumbai, telephonically informed Assistant Police Inspector API , PW14 R.R. Gaekwad of Police Station Tilak Nagar that a man, who was later on, identified as Satish, was lying on the right side of the stairs of the building in a pool of blood.
