RAVIKANT BHAGOJI DHUMAL AND ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [1990] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 68 · Decided: 15-11-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L.M. SHARMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
RAVIKANT BHAGOJI DHUMAL AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
NOVEMBER 15, 1990 
B 
[LAUT MOHAN SHARMA AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
c 
Indian Penal Code: Sections 34, 366 and 376-Prosecution-
Duty of-Lead reliable evidence-Establish without reasonable doubt 
those guilty of offence. 
A young woman of 29, Km. Chandrakala, was travelling from 
Goa to Bombay. The bus stopped at about 9.15 p.m. at Bharana Naka 
near the hotel belonging to accused no. 5, for meals. Chandrakala along 
with the other passengers got down, and she proceeded towards certain 
structure near a tree for attending call of nature. It is alleged that while 
she was in the posture of urinating near the structure, accused no. 1 
D (appellant no. 1), who was a waiter in the hotel, came from behind, 
lifted her and carried her away forcibly. It is said that accused no. 8 
(appellant no. 2) and accused no. 9 (appellant no. 3) also joined. This 
part of the story has been supported by three eye witnesses of tender 
age. 
• 
E 
Accused no. 8 is the son of accused no. 5, and accused no. 9 is a 
friend of accused no. 8. 
The dead body of Chandrakala was discovered the next after-
noon. From the evidence it appeared that the victim was deprived of her 
clothes which were available but not at the appropriate place. Several 
F 
gold ornaments were still on her person. Her purse was also found 
which contained some money, and a chit of paper, described as suicide 
note. 
G 
The medical evidence folly established that she was murdered by 
throttling and was also victim of rape. 
Initially, the members of the crew of the bus were suspected of 
being involved in the crime, and the Sub-Inspector, Khed Police 
Statio-Mr. Ghosalkar, arrested all the five members of its crew. 
Controversy arose as to whether the police investigation was 
H proceeding on the right lines or not. Thereupon, the Deputy Inspector 
68 
-
... 
-
• 
R.B. DHUMAL v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
69 
General of Police passed an order for further investigation to be 
continued by another officer-Mr. M. V. Kulkarni-belonging to the 
Criminal Investigation Department, Pnne. In the course of investiga-
tion, it became clear to Detective Inspector Kulkarni that the members 
of the crew of the bus were innocent. He accordingly sent a report under 
section 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for their dis-
charge. 
After further investigations, nine persons inclnding the present 
appellants were put on trial for offences against varions sections of the 
Indian Penal Code: Eight of the accused persons were acquitted by the 
trial court while accused no. 1 was convicted for offences punishable 
under section 366 and section 376 read with section 34, I.P.C. He was 
however acquitted of the murder charge. 
Two separate appeals were filed, one by the State against the 
order of acquittal and the other by the convicted accused no. 1. 
The High Court maintained the conviction and sentence of accus-
sed no. 1, and further convicted him under section 302 read with section 
34, I.P.C. The High Court also convicted accused nos. 8 and 9 under 
section 366 and section 376, read with section 34 l.P.C. They were 
further convicted nnder section 302 read with section 34 l.P .C. and 
sentenced to imprisonment for life. 
Before this Court it was inter alia contended that the (i) the detec-
tive Inspector Knlkarni was interested both for his personal satisfac-
tion and for the advancement of his career to obtain a conviction in the 
case, and the possibility of his procuring false evidence therefore could 
not be ruled out; and (ii) in view of the order in favour of the members 
of the crew, this case could not have been re-opened later, as the order 
was judicial in nature and closed the case once for all. 
Dismissing the appeal of appellant No. 1 and allowing the appeal 
of appellants Nos. 2 and 3, this Court, 
HELD: (1) The High Court has rightly pointed out the evidence 
and the telling circumstances for coming to the conclusion that the 
investigation in the case, while it was in the hands of Khed Police 
Station, was under the influence of outside agency and the policy offi-
cers were directly associated in attempting to procure false evidence 
against innocent persons. [79E-F] 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
70 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1990] Supp. 3 S.C.R. 
(2) Having considered the evidence and the circumstances in the 
case, it is not permissible to presume that the CID Inspector Kulkarni 
could have fabricat

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.