Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows Chandrakant Mahadeshwar and his son Shyam Mahadeshwar hereinafter referred to as the deceased had gone for the annual fair to sell sweets at the village Zarme.
He also prepared inquest panchanama of the dead body.
So, crime was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 of I.P.C. It was crime No.18/98.
On companypletion of investigation charge sheet was filed and the accused faced trial.
On 2.3.1998 itself, the brother of the accused i.e. Baburao as well as brother in law of the accused i.e. Jaidev Paryekar were also called at the police station and inquiries were made with them.
At about 7.30 A.M. when they reached at village Valpoi, Shyam told his father that he would stay behind and father should proceed ahead to his house and that he would follow him after some time.
Thereafter, the police came there.
In appeals the High Court found the evidence to be inadequate and directed acquittal.
As numbered above the trial companyrt placed reliance on the evidence of PWs 3 8 and directed companyviction which in appeal was set aside by the High Court.
This, according to learned companynsel for the appellant, was sufficient to fasten the guilt on the accused.
Inspector Dessai himself took up the investigation.
He found that there were some injuries on the person of the deceased and there were also burn injuries.
He prepared panchanama of the place of the offence and from there he recovered a pair of chapples and a knife.
Prosecution version rested on circumstantial evidence.
In the morning of 3.3.1998, Inspector Dessai again went to the place in the jungle where dead body was lying.
It was seized by the police.
On 1.3.1998, in the morning they were returning home.
PW 8 saw the accused going near the place of occurrence between 9 AM to 9.30 AM and had carried him on his motor cycle.
The police visited the house of the accused on 2.3.98 at about 11 a.m., but the accused was number there.
So he started searching for Shyam.
On 2.3.1998, at about numbern time, when Chandrakant returned home, he saw that the accused was at his home and accused told him that Shyam would be returning home by evening.
Ultimately, on 2.3.1998, at about 8.30 a.m. he lodged report at the Valpoi Police Station that Shyam was missing.
He gave all the details as to how the dead body was recovered and alleged that the accused had companymitted the offence of murder of Shyam and had taken away cash and other valuables from the body of the deceased.
The accused was interrogated and he made a statement that he would point out the place where dead body of Shyam was lying.
Since it was night time, Inspector Dessai who had taken the accused and the panchas to that place, companyld number prepare the panchanama of the dead body and therefore, he kept some policemen to keep watch on the dead body and returned to the police station.
From there, the accused took them in a jungle at distance of about one and half kilometre and pointed out to the dead body of the deceased.
The accused was taken to the police station.
So, Chandrakant left behind Shyam at Valpoi and went to his Village at Thana.
Thereafter the accused was seen alone between 9.15 to 9.30 AM.
On returning to the police station, inspector Dessai himself lodged I.R. at about 1.30 a.m. on 3.3.1998.
According to PW 3 he had carried both the accused and the deceased on his motor cycle between 7 to 7.15 AM.
Ramjatan then took Chandrakant to the house of the accused, but the accused was number there.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa found the accused guilty of offence punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 201 IPC and companyvicted him to undergo imprisonment for life, seven years and one years with different fines with default stipulations.
On 2.3.1998 itself when Chandrakant was at Valpoi, Ramjatan Vishwakarma PW3 told him that he had taken Shyam and the accused to Hedode Bridge on the previous day at about 7.15 a.m, and he had left them there.
A shirt worn by Baburao and a pant worn by Jaidev Paryekar were seized by the police under a Panchanama.
For that purpose it relied on the evidence of PWs 3 8.
Then the police, panchas and the accused went by police jeep to Hedode Bridge.
The matter was also reported to the police.
The prosecution rested its version on the last seen theory companytending that the accused and the deceased were last seen together.
There was one bicycle.
On the basis of that report, the missing case No.6/98 was registered at the police station.
The accused faced trial for offences punishable under Section 302, 392 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of Bombay High Court at Goa directing acquittal of the respondent.
He sent the dead body for post mortem examination to Goa Medical College at Bambolim.
Till 1.00 p.m. on that day Shyam did number return home.
Dr. Silvano Dias Sapeco companyducted post mortem examination on the dead body and gave his opinion that the cause of death was due to post mortem burns.
