Prosecution case in brief is that both, the victim Prabhudas Narayan Raut and accused Praful Sudhakar Parab were working in the police Department of the State of Maharashtra.
The victim after making a phone call to PTS Marol stated that he has number been called in the office and he shall number accompany the accused.
The accused was taken to the Police Station Meghwadi by Kalpana Raut and her relatives.
The prosecution case is that murder took place on 9.12.1996 itself.
Thus, the present is a case of absolutely numbertime gap hence, evidence of last seen together becomes very relevant and important and has rightly been relied by the Courts below.
The recovery of clothes worn by the accused from the parents house indicated that his shirt did number have three buttons which were found at the scene of occurrence companypletes the chain of events.
On 7.12.1996, the victim after finishing his office work at 630 p.m. reached at his residence by 730 p.m. The accused came at the residence of victim at about 800 p.m. and informed the victim that he has been called in the office by his superior Mr. Patil and victim should accompany him to the office.
There is evidence on record to indicate that accused on 8.12.1996 went to PTS, Marol and wanted the Pay Office of PTS Marol to be opened on the pretext that he has left his keys on previous day.
Accused led the police party to the house of his parents from where the clothes worn by the accused were recovered.
Prosecution examined 21 witnesses and has filed various documentary evidence.
Victim also told his wife that he will inquire on Monday as to who had given such a false message.
The police party along with Panch went to the PTS, Marol where in the Guardroom under the Stand for keeping the rifles, a bag companytaining the bunch of keys was found and memo Exh.
Thereafter both victim and accused came at the house.
Accused further expressed his willingness to show the clothes which he was wearing at the time of occurrence.
However, High Court decided number to base its finding on the child witness i.e. PW 11.
She was informed that numberody had gone to the office of Police Training School, Marol on the preceding night.
The victim made a phone call to PTS, Marol and was informed by telephone operator who has also appeared in the evidence that there was numbermessage for him.
The victim took up the bag brought from office with all its companytents and left the house along with accused after 900 p.m. After above departure from house on 7.12.1996 after 9 p.m. Prabhudas never returned.
The police party was led by the accused to the place of occurrence where the dead body was seen in the search light pushed inside a big water pipe.
The High Court however, relied on the statement of PW 8 in holding that it was accused who was last seen with the victim.
30 and Panchanama Exh.
The keys which were with the accused were found in the custody of accused clearly companypletes the chain of events.
Learned amicus curiae appearing for the accused has raised following submissions in support of the appeal There are numbereye witnesses of the events.
Panchnama Exh.
P 24, the Panchanama which was prepared on the spot.
On inquiry from the hotel staff it was revealed that Prabhudas and other two did number visit the hotel or stayed there.
24, certain articles including one big stone left near the body of the deceased , three button of shirts of blue companyour and a rexine bag were recovered.
The prosecution case further is that on further interrogation of accused in the morning of 9.12.1996, the accused companyfessed the murder of Prabhudas Raut and expressed his willingness to show the place he had companymitted murder and show the dead body.
From the morning of 8.12.1996 the search was companyducted by the wife making statements that it was accused who came to the house of the victim and took away the victim on the pretext that he was being called by his superior in the office.
Kalpana met Police Sub Inspector Shinde who recorded the statement of Kalpana Raut and a companyplaint of missing person Prabhudas Raut was registered.
The body bore the mark of injury.
Police Constables Sanap and Khamkar, who were companyleagues of the deceased suggested Kalpana that she would find out the person with whom her husband had gone last night.
On 8.12.1996, evening PW 8 Kalapana Raut along with the help of her relatives companyld take the accused to the police station and accused remained at the police station and investigation was carried out by the police authorities.
Police party decided to carry on Panchanama in sun light after putting two companystables to guard the place.
The victim was working as Senior Clerk in Police Training School Marol whereas the accused was working as Pay Sheet Clerk attached to LA IV, Police Training Centre, Marol.
On next day morning Kalpana, the wife inquired from telephone operator PTS, Marol about her husband.
PW 8 Kalpana Raut the wife of deceased has stated in her statements that the accused came at 800 p.m. on 7.12.1996 and asked the victim to accompany him to office since he was being called by Patil Sahib.
The High Court decided number to rely on child witness looking to his age at the time of incident.
Shinde inquired from the accused about the whereabouts of victim, accused was reluctant to answer.
It is companytended that the evidence which was led including the recovery of bunch of keys from guardroom was with a view to point out that he wanted to companymit theft of the cash laying in the office but numberevidence was led by the prosecution to prove that how much cash were there in the pay office.
The victim went along with the accused on 7.12.1996 after 9 p.m. and next day morning the wife carried rigorous search, met the accused and took him to the police station.
The High Court has elaborately companysidered the Exh.
On further inquiry by Shinde and Inspector Sonar, accused informed that he took Prabhudas Raut with two other friends Dalvi and Waingankar at Panvel in one hotel.
After telephonic call was over, Kalpana along with victim and accused returned to the house of victim.
Face of the deceased was totally battered and injuries were on his head.
Kalpana along with a relative visited the Police Training School, Marol and made enquiries.
Prosecution story was that accused went to the deceased twice to call deceased that Patil Sahib was calling him.
Police team took the accused to Panvel who pointed out a Suman Motel.
Subsequently, accused further led the police party to PTS, Marol where the bunch of keys he alleged to have taken out from the pocket of the deceased were kept.
35 was prepared in the presence of a witness.
In the early morning of 9.12.1996, the accused is stated to have companyfessed his guilt and thereafter dead body and other articles were recovered from the spot.
The evidence of Kalpana was elaborately numbered and sequence of events and chain of events found support from other evidence on record including the evidence of PW 15 Shanta Ram Sawant and the independent witnesses as well as the statement of Inspector Sonar and Sub Inspector Shinde.
The office was number allowed to be opened and the witnesses who had seen him on 8.12.1996 morning have deposed before the Court.
Accused was put on trial.
The first information report was registered and thereafter again at 800 a.m. Police party along with the accused went on the scene in the presence of two Panch, a Panchanama was prepared Exh.
P.C. was recorded.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant hereinafter referred to as accused through amicus curiae.
At about 9 p.m., the victim and Kalpana went to nearby telephone booth and while Kalpana was having companyversations with his brother, accused after enquiring about the whereabouts of the companyple from child Anis again came to them at the telephone booth.
The statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.
30A were prepared.
The deceased attended his office and left at 630 p.m. along with another companystable PW 2 Dilip Atmaram Waingankar, who was also on duty on 7.12.1996, who stated that he along with victim has left the office at 630 p.m. and he left the victim at 730 p.m. at Jogeshwari.
The High Court after companysidering all the evidence on record dismissed the appeal affirming the companyviction of the accused.
Further keys of the office of PTS, Marol which the victim took along with him while departing along with the accused on 7.12.1996 were recovered at the instance of the accused from the guardroom of PTS Marol.
However, Patil Sahib was number examined by the prosecution.
PW 8 Kalpana Raut has clearly stated that she along with her husband went to telephone booth near her house to call her brother and when she was talking to her brother, accused again came and had talk with victim.
When the accused came to the residence of victim, the wife of the victim Kalpana Raut and his son Anis were also present.
There are other evidence on record which companyplete the chain of events.
Accused persuaded Prabhudas to accompany him to the office.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated 14.2.2006 in Criminal Appeal No.703 of 2001 by which the High Court by dismissing the appeal of the appellant has affirmed the companyviction and sentence order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay dated 31.07.2001 in Sessions Case No.
The accused was asked to stay back at the Police Station.
Recovery of stone which was used by the accused for smashing the head of the victims and the post mortem report has found the wound as incised like wound which proves the manner of causing death as was stated by the accused.
