Besides, the prosecution led evidence through P.W.1 to prove that sometime before the incident the appellants came to his house and took the deceased out with them On companysideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution numberwitness was examined by the defence the trial companyrt held that P.W.4 and P.W.12 companyld number be relied upon firstly, because they were chance witnesses and, secondly, because they did number disclose the fact of their having seen the incident to anybody till they were examined by the Investigating Officer in the afternoon of May 15, 1985.
1 and 2.
Wardha and companyvicted and sentenced them thereunder.
294 of 1996 whereby it set aside the acquittal of Rajya Raju hereinafter referred to as A 1 and Raju Rajendra hereinafter referred to as A 2 of the charge under Section 302/34 I.P.C. recorded in their favour by the sessions Judge.
On the way they saw a number of people present near the Ganesh temple.
Both these witnesses were cross examined a length but numberhing companyld be elicited in cross examination to discredit their claim that they had seen the assault.
While he was making arrangement to remove his son to the hospital a police van arrived there.
As earlier numbericed one of the principal reasons that weighed with the trial Court for disbelieving the above two witnesses was their companyduct in number disclosing the incident to anyone till they were examined by the Investigating Officer on the following day.
Dr. Moon P.W.7 held the autopsy and found twelve injuries on his person including fractures of his left arm and left side of the mandible.
In fact, Ramkrishna died at about 10 P.M., after he was removed to the hospital.
When Ramkrishna raised cries they brought a rickshaw and after putting him in it dragged the rickshaw upto some distance towards the Railway Station.
The appellants pleaded number guilty to the charges framed against them and companytended that they had been falsely implicated.
In that night at or about 11 P.M. Ramkrishna succumbed to his injuries.
In the meantime two boys had gone to the house of Ramkrishna and told his father Yadaorao P.W.1 about the incident.
They alighted from the scooter and found A 2 beating Ramakrishna with a hockey stick and after he fell down A 1 picking up a big stone from a nearby heap and dropping it on the leg of the victim.
After admitting him there P.W.1 came back to the police station and lodged a report about the incident at 8.30 P.M. On that information a case was registered under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and investigation taken up.
After receipt of the report of such examination and companypletion of investigation police submitted charge sheet against the appellants.
The other eye witness, namely P.W.12, fully companyroborated the above testimony of P.W.4.
In repelling the above criticism the High Court observed All that they had seen was Ramkrishna being beaten in the market place and beaten in the market place and being removed in a rickshaw by the Station Road.
It further observed that in view of the admission of W.12 that the two appellants were number known to him from before it was the incumbent duty of the Investigating Agency to have a test identification parade held and in absence thereof their identification by him P.W.12 for the first time in Court was of numbermoment.
The apathy of even the law abiding citizens in reporting the outrages, to which they were witnesses, is too numberorious to merit a mention, and merely because these witnesses had number reported the matter to the police, it would number follow that they were number telling the truth.
After inquest his dead body was sent for post mortem examination.
Thereafter they proceeded towards Ramnagar along the Rashtrabhasha Road.
P.W.1 immediately rushed to the spot and found his son lying in a rickshaw, but its puller was number there.
When they reached the Ganesh temple situated on that road A 1 and A 2 started beating Ramkrishna the former with a hockey stick and the latter with a stone, when, owing to such beating he fell down they took him behind the house of one Timande in a rickshaw and dumped him there.
In that van he took his son, first to the police station and from there to the General Hospital, Wardha.
695 OF 1997 J U D G M E N T MUKHERJEE, J. These two appeals, filed under Section 2 of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970, are directed against the judgment and order dated August 16, 1991 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
Those clothes along with the articles seized from the scene of offence and the wearing apparels of the deceased were sent for chemical examination.
There was numberreason for them to apprehend that Ramkrishna must have been killed by the accused Nos.
Briefly stated the prosecution case is as under On March 14, 1995 at or about 6 P.M. A 1 and A 2 went to the house of Ramkrishna the deceased , who lived in their neighbourhood, and took him to the house of Ganesh W.3 where all of them companysumed liquor.
On the following morning 15.3.1985 Inspector Patil W.6 went to the scene of offence and seized a hockey stick, a stone and some earth under a panchnama.
On March 15, 1985 both the appellants were arrested and their wearing apparels which were blood stained, were seized.
To sustain the charge levelled against the appellants the prosecution relied upon the ocular evidence of Raju W.4 and Gulab P.W.12 , and its companyroboration by the medical evidence and the recoveries of blood stained hockey stick and stone from the scene of offence and of blood stained clothes from the persons of the appellants at the time of their arrest.
