Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence: Chain of Circumstances Not Fully Established: Bombay High Court Acquits Two in 2009 Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, has acquitted two individuals, Dattatrao @ Bandu Vithalrao Sarje and Amol s/o Narayanrao Patange, in the 2009 murder case of Vishal Balwant Patange. The bench comprising R. G. Avachat and Neeraj P. Dhote, J., held that the prosecution failed to establish a conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence against the appellants.

The court observed, "The prosecution has failed to prove the circumstances so as to form a complete chain which would point towards guilt of the appellants." This observation was pivotal in the decision to overturn the earlier conviction and life sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli in Sessions Trial No. 45 of 2010.

The case, primarily resting on circumstantial evidence, raised significant questions regarding the 'last seen theory' and the discovery of the deceased’s belongings. The court critically analyzed the testimony of PW7 - Pralhad Bapusaheb Patange, who claimed to have seen the deceased last with the appellants. The bench found inconsistencies in the witness's testimony, noting, "In the light of this evidence of PW 1 - Balwant, the evidence of PW 7 - Pralhad Bapusaheb Patange regarding travelling of deceased Vishal in the Bus, is required to be seen with doubt."

Furthermore, the recovery of deceased Vishal’s belongings from open places did not conclusively link the appellants to the crime. The court added, "Though the said articles are identified by PW1 Balwant and PW8 Jayabai as that of deceased Vishal, it is strange how three (3) boots can be that of one person i.e., of deceased Vishal."

The judgment also upheld the trial court's acquittal of the co-accused, citing a lack of conclusive evidence against them. The bench remarked on the acquittal applications filed by the State and PW1 Balwant, "Sans evidence against the co-accused, the learned Trial Court has rightly acquitted the co-accused."

Date of Decision: 30 January 2024

Dattatrao @ Bandu Vithalrao Sarje VS The State of Maharashtra

 

Similar News