The Bombay high court has acquitted three Pune residents of killing a person from their neighbourhood, 24 years after they were booked for the crime. A division bench of justices VK Tahilramani and IK Jain granted relief to the trio for want of clinching evidence and credible eyewitnesses.
The Bombay high court has acquitted three Pune residents of killing a person from their neighbourhood, 24 years after they were booked for the crime. A division bench of justices VK Tahilramani and IK Jain granted relief to the trio for want of clinching evidence and credible eyewitnesses.
A trial court in Pune had dropped murder charges against Nikhil Sorate, Imtiyaz Khan and Anand Bahot in 1993, prompting the government to challenge the ruling in the HC. A fourth accused, identified as Papa Antony, died during the pendency of the case.
According to the prosecution, on November 3, 1991, the accused started assaulting one Shami Shaikh, who resided in their neighbourhood. Joseph M, a passerby, informed Shaikh's brother Shahid about the attack.
As Shahid rushed to his brother's rescue, the attackers fled the spot. Shahid took Shami to Sassoon Hospital where doctors declared him dead on arrival. Based on Shahid's complaint, the police pressed murder charges against the trio and the now-deceased person. However, the case saw twists and turns from the very beginning.
Joseph had told the trial court that the cops had threatened to implicate his brother in the case if he did not give a statement against the accused. The trial court had discarded Joseph's testimony terming it unreliable.
The HC bench observed that Shahid, who was not an eyewitness, had merely reported the matter to the police and therefore "his evidence is not of much help to the prosecution".
The judges also discarded the testimonies of two other eyewitnesses saying: "The fact that they (eyewitnesses) kept mum about the incident and did not disclose it to anyone till their statements were recorded by the police some days after the incident shows that their conduct is highly unnatural and improbable."
Ruling in favour of Sorate, Khan and Bahot, the bench said, "There is no other cogent and clinching evidence on record to connect any of the respondents to the crime. Looking to the evidence on record, we find that conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge is a reasonable and possible view."
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}