The Bombay High Court has set aside the conviction of five men in the 2017 murder of Nikhil More at Nashik, holding that the trial court erred in relying solely on the testimony of two injured eyewitnesses whose conduct was found to be “unnatural” and riddled with inconsistencies. A Division Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Manjusha Deshpande allowed the appeals filed by accused persons.
The appellants had been convicted by the Sessions Court in 2020 under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 143 and 324 IPC for allegedly attacking victim with sickles and choppers. Two of victim’s friends claimed to be injured eyewitnesses to the fatal assault.
However, the High Court found serious infirmities in the prosecution’s case. It noted that although the two witnesses claimed to have known the assailants, they did not disclose the attackers’ identities for over five hours, despite being conscious, in the presence of police officers, and declared medically fit to give statements as early as 11:50 p.m. Their first statement naming the accused emerged only at 4:30 a.m.
The Court held this behaviour to be “unnatural”, particularly given the admitted history of enmity and cross-cases between the parties a factor that heightened the possibility of false implication. The Bench also noted that the prosecution failed to examine crucial witnesses, including the two men who allegedly transported the injured to the hospital, and even failed to seize the Maruti car used for the same.
Additionally, the trial court itself had disbelieved key aspects of the prosecution case including the presence of PW6, recovery of weapons, ballistic evidence, and material contradictions in the account regarding firing by one of the accused. The medical and forensic evidence did not corroborate the prosecution’s narrative, the High Court observed.
Given the serious omissions, contradictions and lack of independent corroboration, the Court held that reliance on the sole testimony of PW4 and PW5 was unsafe. It concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all appellants. Those in custody were ordered to be released forthwith upon execution of PR bonds under Section 481 BNSS.
Appearances:
Ms. Pushpa Ganediwala a/w. Ms. Anima Mishra, Mr. Vinod Patil, Mr. Anuj Singh, Mr. Anshu Agrawal and Mr. Ankit Rathod for appellant in APPEAL/178/21.
Mr. Vivek M. Punjabi a/w. Ms. Shweta Bhagchandani, Mr. Priyansh R. Jain and Ms. Parichhar Zaiwala for appellants in APPEAL/191/21 & 181/21.
Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w. Ms. Abhilasha Pawar and Mr. Amit Icham for appellant in APPEAL/189/21.
Mr. Ateet Shirodkar a/w. Mr. Bhavin Jain and Mr. Kunjan Makwana for appellant in APPEAL/634/24.
Ms. Sangita Phad, APP for respondent-State in all appeals/applications.
