This mill was closed down some ten years back prior to 1988 and Noorbhai was to look after the property and machinery that was lying at Allana Mill.
During inerrogation he made a statement which led to the discovery of certain incriminating article.
Dr. Jairajbhai P.W.1 held the autoosy on 16.2.1988 at about 10.30.
According to the prosecution, Noorbhai on 12.2.88 was on duty from 9.00 A.M. to 12 Noon and from 4.00 P.M. to 7.00 M. Usually, Noorbhai used to return from his work at about 7.00 P.M. Since he did number return, Mohd.
Hussain P.W.2 , therefore, started making further enquiries with his relatives but he companyld number get any useful information.
The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
A.M. and numbered as many as six injuries.
The sons of Noorbhai then went to the pond and it was found that the dead body was of Noorbahai.
Injury No.1 was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death.
An iron strip was also found to have been inserted in the mouth.
On 16th February, 1988 Deva Rama P.W.4 during investigation stated that the appellant on 12.2.88 had companyfessed before him at about 7.30 p.m. that he had companymitted the murder of Noorbhai and requested him to help him in this behalf.
For nearly three days the family members of Noorbhai companyld number get any information about the whereabouts of Noorbhai.
During investigation it was suspected that the appellant who was also working as a Watchman in the mill would know something about the incident.
Dr. Jairajbhai P.W.1 opined that the cause of death was haemorrhage shock due to major vessels injury over the front of the neck.
The Investigating Officer, thereafter, arrested the appellant and during interrogation he made a statement which led to the discovery of certain clothes of the deceased and hoe which were buried near the pond.
The inquest Panchnama was then carried out wherein several injuries on the person of Noorbhai were recorded.
Hussain W.2 went in search of him and after making enquiries he learnt that Noorbhai had left the mill premises at about 7.00 P.M. Till late in the evening the whereabouts of Noorbhai were number known number he returned on the following day.
Rest of the evidence is companysisted of the witnesses including two sons of Noorbhai, inquest Panch witness, Medical Officer Dr. Jairajbhai Patel P.W.1 and the Investigating Officer Manmchan Tarachand P.W.15 .Haji Noorbhai P.W.3 who happen to be another son of Noorbhai then went to Junagarh and Rajkot in search of his father but he companyld number get any useful information.
The dead body was then sent to the hospital at Veraval.
He was residing inside the companypound of Allana Mill.
According to him, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime.
The dead body of Noorbhai was taken out of the Pond with the held of fire brigade.
Immediately a message was sent to Veraval Police Station and the police party arrived at the scene.
The prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses at the trial of whom Deva Ram P.W.4 , Ramesh Bhojabhai PW.9 and Jagmal Arjan P.W.12 are the material witnesses to prove the above two circumstances.
These articles were seized under various Panchnamas.
On 15.2.88 it was learnt that a dead body was floating in the pond situated near the Allana Mill companypound on the back side.
The prosecution sought to rely upon this extra judicial companyfession alleged to have been made by the appellant to Deva Rama P.W.4 .
The clothes of the deceased and other articles were sent to Chemical Analyzer for examination.
Haji Noorbahai P.W.3 who happen to be another son of Noorbhai then went to Junagarh and Rajkot in search of his father but he was number found there.
The prosecution case as disclosed during the trial is as under Noorbhai since deceased was working as a Watchman with Allana Mill at Veraval.
After companypleting the investigation, the appellant was put up for trial for offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of Bombay Police Act.
P. Kurdukar, J. The appellant accused after obtaining special leave has filed this Criminal Appeal Challenging the legality and companyrectness of the judgement and order dated December, 1996 passed by the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code has been companyfirmed.
