Accused No.2 Bhadikar registered the offence under section 302 read with 34, I.P.C. vide crime No.263/87.
Till this time there was numbercomplain of any ill treatment of the accused.
It was alleged that this dead body was that of deceased Dilip and his finger prints were taken and it was sought to be matched with the finger prints on one receipt of purchase of a company and it was sought to be companynected with that of the deceased so as to establish that this was the dead body of deceased Dilip who was taken away by the police jeep and the same was disposed of at Adilabad in A.P. by the accused persons.
During the companyrse of investigation this fact came to the light.
The dead body was in a decomposed companydition and it was cremated.
The Division Bench also directed payment of fine of Rs.30,000/ each by original accused Nos.1,2 3 Rs.15,000/ by original accused No.6 Rs.10,000/ each by original accused Nos.10, 11, 13, 15, 16 17.
Hence, the present appeals by the accused appellants.
Though he was called to identify the dead body of Dilip but he deposed that he failed to identify the dead body of the deceased Dilip.
P.W.3 Babarao Naware, another witness who was also there in the police lock up along with the deceased.
Original accused Nos.1 to 3 were directed to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ each accused No.6 to pay fine of Rs.5,000/ and accused Nos.10,11,13,15,16 17 were directed to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/ each.
P.W.5 was also arrested along with the deceased Dilip.
The investigation of the case was taken over by P.I. Bhadikar the accused appellant.
But unfortunately, P.Ws.7, 20, 21, 9 10 all have been declared hostile.
He stated that one Paradhi boy was brought out of the Police station and the accused persons were beating him with sticks, fist and kicks.
For this the prosecution has led the evidence of some of the witnesses like Ws.7, 20 and 21 to substantiate that the dead body of the deceased was seized by the Police at Adilabad A.P. P.W.5 produced a sale receipt of company from another person to whom the deceased Dilip had sold his company, which bears his thumb impression.
The police prepared a defence that the accused escaped from the Police station and therefore, registered a case being crime No.624/87 under Section 224, IPC on 6.11.1987.
He deposed that there is a police lock up which is separate from the Magistrate lock up.
Dilip Khusmya Ghosale hereinafter to be referred to as Dilip who was one of the Suspects in the aforesaid crime was taken up from the police lock up to Detection Branch room for interrogation by some of the accused appellants and it is alleged that his hands were tied down and he was administered beating by kicks and fist blows and during this interrogation, Dilip died in the Detection Branch centre.
It is alleged by the prosecution that a dead body was found lying in Adilabad, Andhra Pradesh and the post mortem was companyducted on the dead body by the P. S.Adilabad.
He was also arrested along with the deceased Dilip and another accused detained in the police custody.
This is the total eye witnesses produced by the prosecution to substantiate the allegation against the accused.
During the companyrse of investigation, on 5.11.1987 the police arrested seven persons namely 1 Bastam Devidas Pawar, 2 Comrade Bhimrao Pawar, 3 Dilip Khusmya Ghosale, 4 Chaubharat Ramchandra Ghosale, 5 Partya Khusmya Ghosale, 6 Navbharat Ramachandra Ghosale and 7 Gangacharan Sukhadeo Pawar.
This witness has an outstanding criminal records i.e. 35 36 criminal cases are pending against him.
The first part of the evidence has to be closely examined whether the testimony of these witnesses is to be accepted and to what extent ?
P.Ws.7, 20 21 were produced to substantiate that the dead body of the deceased was taken in a jeep and P.Ws.9 10 were produced to show that the receipt which was scribed by P.W.10 which bears the thumb impression of the deceased and the same was sought to be companynected with the finger prints which were taken from the dead body by spoon method but this circumstantial evidence has also number been accepted by the trial companyrt.
He deposed that there are three windows in the room and that he heard the shricks, therefore he woke up and numbericed the incident through that window and he found that as a result of beating the paradhi boy i.e. the deceased Dilip became unconscious.
These witnesses alleged that deceased Dilip was detained along with them and Dilip was being taken with his hands tied for interrogation and he was administered beating and he shouted for sometime but after some time numbershouting was heard and thereafter the deceased died.
He went to the extent of implicating the DSP, In charge of the Police station.
He further stated that some water was brought and sprinkled on the face of the deceased.
He also deposed that he heard the screaming of Dilip in the night at about 12 to 2 A.M. Thereafter, it is alleged that the deceased Dilip was number brought back alive in the Police station.
He was the brother of deceased Dilip.
The case was companymitted to the companyrt of session.
W.4, who was also held up in a dacoity case, has admitted that he was arrested along with other accused persons.
Therefore, one Dr.Shyam Sundr Bhutada approached the companycerned Superintendent of Police and informed him that it was a rumour in the town that one Dilip has died in the police custody.
He was shown the photograph of the dead body of the deceased Dilip at Adilabad Police station but he failed to identify the dead body.
2,3,4 5.
He has deposed that this receipt was given by him to the Police.
The prosecution examined a large number of witnesses in order to substantiate the allegation that accused Dilip died in the police custody.
Thereafter, the investigation was taken up by Shri Goswami who recorded the statement of all the companyaccused who were held up in that dacoity case along with deceased Dilip and after companypletion of necessary investigation all the 17 accused persons including one D.S.P., incharge of the Police station were charged under sections 302, 201 read with Section 34, IPC.
He has categorically denied that the body which was shown to him was that of Dilip.
On the night intervening between 5.11.1987 and 6.11.1987 when all the accused above mentioned were in police custody on remand by the Magistrate, the police was interrogating all the accused at the Police station, Arvi.
In default of payment of fine, they were to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two years.
After some time the beating stopped and Dilip was number brought back to the room.
The Division Bench of the High Court, Bombay Bench at Nagpur reviewed the whole evidence on record and reversed the order of acquittal of all the accused persons and companyvicted them as aforesaid by its order dated 17.1.2005.
He also admitted that he has number deposed before the Police but for the first time he is deposing in the Court.
It appears that after some time the higher ups in the Department came to know about this fact and therefore, this case was taken up by the C.I.D., Crime and it was entrusted to P.W.,28, Deputy Superintendent of Police Bhagwangir Goswami on 24.12.1987.
He also deposed that Dilip had sold his company to Baraku Wadi carpenter and a receipt was executed to that effect.
One Namdeo Tulshiram Taywade, filed a companyplaint to this effect that the alleged dacoity has taken place in his house in which the inmates of the house were injured and certain ornaments had been taken away from his house.
P.W.2 was an accused who was being prosecuted under Sections 302 307, IPC.
The substantive sentences under section 302 read with 34, I.P.C. and under section 201 read with section 34, I.P.C. were directed to run companycurrently.
The finger prints which were taken by the Police before disposal of the dead body by the Police at Adilabad Police station was sought to be matched with the thumb impression of the deceased Dilip by producing handwriting expert, P.W.23 that the thumb impression was that of the deceased.
But some said beating took place in open place near the temple.
On the basis of this report, a case was registered on 24.10.1987 against unknown persons under sections 395, 397 398, IPC vide Crime No.254 of 1987.
He also deposed that the accused No.2 along with other members of the Staff of police administered beating to the deceased and he went to the extent of implicating Deputy Superintendent of Police.
After appreciating the evidence the trial companyrt disbelieved all these witnesses.
W I T H Criminal Appeal Nos.
This receipt is alleged to have been received by him from his mother.
The police was granted custody remand for seven days for the purpose of recovery of weapons of offence as well as stolen property.
He only deposed that the police took accused Dilip handcuffed from the room and he heard the shout of Dilip of beating.
W.5 did number state who did the beating.
Then the deceased boy did number regain his companysciousness and a police jeep was called and he was taken with handcuffed.
Then some of the accused persons told that the deceased was knowingly pretending to be unconscious and therefore, they further subjected him to beating.
It is alleged that though Dilip died on account of beating , but in order to companyer up this fact, the police registered a case under section 224, IPC on 6.11.1987 at 2.15 O clock that the accused Dilip has escaped from the police custody and thereafter wireless message was sent all over the State describing the general features of the accused Dilip.
Other accused were also there with him i.e. Babarao Neware and Sadashiv Uike involved in some other crime.
The police arrested these persons and sought for judicial remand from the Judicial Magistrate for the purpose of investigation.
The case of the prosecution was that he was taken for interrogation in the interrogation room on the relevant date and he expired and in order to substantiate the allegation, the prosecution produced some of the witnesses who were already in the custody along with accused Dilip, namely P.Ws.
Apart from this evidence, circumstantial evidence was also sought to be pressed into service that the dead body which was seized by the Adilabad Police station was that of the deceased Dilip.
Hence, the present appeals by the accused appellants.
Thereafter, he lodged a written companyplaint in the police station and this report was taken up by the In charge of the Police station.
Learned Second Additional Sessions Judge after recording necessary evidence came to the companyclusion that the prosecution has failed to substantiate the allegation against the accused police personnel and gave the benefit of doubt to all the accused persons and acquitted all of them.
Aggrieved against the order of acquittal passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge dated 30.4.1996, the State preferred an appeal before the High Court against all the accused persons.
They were assaulting the boy in front of the temple of the Police station.
He also made a lot of improvements in his testimony like that he involved Deputy Superintendent of Police, Wardha who is one of the assailants and according to him, accused Kishore assaulted.
Brief facts giving rise to filing of the present appeals are that the deceased Dilip along with other suspects were involved in a dacoity case which took place in the village Takarheda within the jurisdiction of Police station, Arvi.
He deposed that he knew accused Nos.1,2,3, 7,9,11, 13 and 16 and he admitted that he along with deceased Dilip were held up in a dacoity case.
It appears that for some time numberhing happened but some public spirited persons got a scent of it that some accused has died in police custody.
Accused appellant No.1 took up the investigation.
