Nayana Pujari Case Judgement

1 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
Received on : 04/02/2010
Registered on : 04/02/2010
Decided on : 09/05/2017.
Duration

: 7 Y 3 M 5 D
I N T H E S E S S I O N S C O U R T , P U N E .
(Before: Smt. L.L.Yenkar, District Judge11 and
Additional Sessions Judge, Pune. )
SESSIONS CASE NO.106/2010 EXH. NO. 417.
State of Maharashtra | Complainant.
Through Yerawada Police Station, Pune. |
Versus
1] Yogesh Ashok Raut, |
Age: 24 Years, Occ.: Driver, |
Residing at & Post Golegaon, |
Tal. Khed, District Pune. |
|
2] Mahesh Balasaheb Thakur, |
Age 24 years, Occ. Agriculturist, |
Residing at & Post Solu, |
Tal. Khed, District Pune. | Accused.
|
3] Vishwas Hindurao Kadam, |
Age 26 years, Occ. Driver, |
Residing at Dighi Gaon, Near Super |
Market, Pune. (C/o. Jayram Pandit |
Tal. Haveli, District Pune). |
Originally resident of Ghurakwadi, |
Tal. Khatav, District Satara. |
Offences under sections 120B, 364 read
with section 120B, 364 read with
section 34, 366 read with section 120B, 366
read with section 34, 376(2)(g) read with
section 120B, 394, 397 read with section 34,
2
302 read with section 120B, 302 read with
section 34, 404 read with section 120B, 404
read with section 34, 201 read with section
120B alternatively 201 read with section 34
of the Indian Penal Code.
===================================
Shri. Harshad Nimbalkar, Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
Shri. A.B. Aloor, Advocate for the accused No. 1 to 3.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 9th May, 2017)
The accused have faced this trial for having committed
offences punishable under sections Offences under sections 120B,
364 read with section 120B, 364 read with section 34, 366 read
with section 120B, 366 read with section 34, 376(2)(g) read with
section 120B, 394, 397 read with section 34, 302 read with
section 120B, 302 read with section 34, 404 read with section
120B, 404 read with section 34, 201 read with section 120B
alternatively 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2] Facts of the prosecution case in brief, can be

summarized as below :
Nayana Pujari, a Software Engineer, aged 28 years old,
(since deceased) was working with Synechron Company. She
used to travel to her work place by her company transport or
public transport or by an auto. On the evening of 7102009, she
was working till late hours and she missed the company transport.
3] While leaving from office at about 8.00 p.m., Nayana
phoned her husband Abhijit Pujari that she is coming home by
P.M.T. bus as the cab of company is not available. As Nayana did
not return, Abhijit went to bus stop at Katraj Milk Dairy. But
Nayana did not return. He searched Nayana along with his friend
Abhijit Aradhye. Nayana was not found. Ultimately, he lodged
missing complaint with Yerawada police station at about 2.00 to
2.30 a.m.
4] According to the prosecution case, the accused persons
under the guise of taking Nayana Pujari to Hadapsar and dropping
her at Hadapsar, in pursuance to the criminal conspiracy hatched
by them, abducted her by Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952
and she was taken to the ground near Shankar Parvati Mangal
Karyalaya at Wagholi, within the jurisdiction of Yerawada police
station. Nayana Pujari was picked up from Reliance Mall on Nagar
road by offering lift. The accused committed gang rape on
Nayana. They took away her ornaments, cash amount etc. from
her purse and thereafter they murdered her taking her to Jarewadi
bifurcation, Wafgaon road, Tal. Khed, District Pune, first by
strangulating her by means of her Odhani and then smashing her
face and head by hitting by heavy stones with an intention that
she should not be identified. The accused by leaving the dead
body of Nayana at the gutter near Jarewadi bifurcation went away
by Indica car.
5] On 8102009 at about 16.05 hours at Khed police

station, A.P.I. Shri. R.H. Chikate was told by P.S.O. Shri. Damse
that one unknown person has informed on phone that a dead body
of unknown girl, aged 18 to 20 years, is lying in the gutter by the
side of Jarewadi Fata to Jarewadi road, near forest. A.P.I. Shri.
4
Chikate and P.S.O. Shri. Damse, on visiting the dead body of that
unknown female, lying in supine condition, which later on came to
be identified as that of Nayana Pujari, prepared inquest
panchnama (Exh.76). The dead body was then dispatched for
post mortem. Spot panchnama (Exh.78) was prepared in
presence of two panchas namely Shivaji Khandu Bhambure
(P.W.2) and Mahendra Maruti Manjare on 8102009 itself. Blood
stained stones were seized from the spot. A.P.I. Shri. Chikate went
to police station and lodged report/F.I.R. This F.I.R. resulted in
registration of crime vide crime No. 173/09 of Khed police station
and investigation was set in motion.
6] On 9102009, Abhijit Pujari, the husband of Nayana
Pujari, who has lodged missing complaint about missing of his
wife was called at Yerawada police station. From police station,
he went to Rural Hospital, Khed along with police. He identified
the dead body kept in post mortem room as that of his wife
Nayana. He had seen her Salwar, Dupatta, ear tops, finger ring
etc. and identified those articles.
7] As missing complaint bearing No. 320/09 was

registered with Yerawada police station, the papers were
transferred from Khed police station to Yerawada police station
and crime No. 534/2009 came to be registered. Investigation was
accordingly started by Yerawada police station. As the offence was
registered against unknown persons, the parallel investigation was
being carried out by Unit Four Officer Karbhari Handore and
Shaukat Shabirali Sayyad.
8] The accused No.1 came to be arrested on 16102009.
Accused No.2 came to be arrested on 16102009. Accused No.3
came to be arrested on 8122009. Accused Rajesh Chadhari was
arrested on 16102009. Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952
involved in the commission of crime came to be seized on 1610
2009. Confessional statement (Exh.128) of accused No.1 Yogesh
Raut dated 21102009 resulted in recovery of his clothes and
cash amount of Rs.11,000/ vide panchnama Exh.129.
Confessional statement (Exh.126) of accused No.2 Mahesh
Thakur resulted in recovery of Rs.6,000/ and clothes vide
panchnama Exh. 127. Confessional statement (Exh.119) of the
accused No.3 Vishwas Kadam recorded on 12122009 resulted in
recovery of gold bangle from the house of his friend Chandansing
Thakur. Confessional statement (Exh.133) of accused No.3
Vishwas Kadam dated 17122009 resulted in recovery of his
clothes and a knife vide panchnama Exh.134. Confessional
statement (Exh.185) of accused Rajesh Chaudhari dated 2810
2009 resulted in recovery of seven visiting cards vide panchnama
Exh.186. .
9] The Investigating Officer Shri. Deepak Sawant

collected post mortem report. He recorded the statements of
witnesses. He sent seized articles for chemical analysis. Test
Identification Parade of accused was conducted through Special
Judicial Magistrate Shri. D.M. Bansode on 1012010 and
memorandum of T.I. Parade is vide Exh.231.
10] On completion of investigation, the Investigating

Officer Shri. Deepak Sawant has filed charge sheet against the
6
accused under the above referred sections. As the offences under
sections 366, 376(2)(g) and 302 and 201 etc. of the Indian Penal
Code are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, subsequently,
the case came to be committed to the Court of Sessions.
11] The accused appeared before the Court of Sessions. In
the meanwhile, before framing charge, accused Rajesh Pandurang
Chaudhari moved an application vide Exh.13 under section 306
of the Code of Criminal Procedure and has prayed for permitting
him to become an approver and tender pardon. The application
Exh.13 came to be allowed and as per order dated 1972010,
pardon is tendered to accused No.2 Rajesh Chaudhari on the
condition of his making full and true disclosure of the whole of the
circumstances within his knowledge relating to offences and to
every other person concerned, whether as principal or abettor in
the commission thereof. As per the said order, the learned Judicial
Magistrate, F.C., Pune, was directed to record statement of Rajesh
Chaudhari as per provisions of section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and forward the same to the Sessions Court. In
pursuance to the order of the Sessions Court, learned Judicial
Magistrate, F.C. recorded statement (Exh. 187) of Rajesh
Chaudhari under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
12] As pardon was tendered to accused Rajesh Chaudhari,
charge was framed by my learned predecessor against the accused
Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam vide Exh. 46.
The statements of the accused were recorded vide Exh.47 to 49.
The charge was read over and explained to the accused. The
accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and they claimed to be
tried. Their defence was that of total denial.
13] The accused persons have submitted their written

statements vide Exhs. 369, 370 and 371. The sum and substance
of their statements is that Rajesh Chaudhari and his friends Sagar
Sonawane and Sunil Chaudhari have committed offences and they
had falsely been implicated in this case.
14] Here, it has to be noted that my learned predecessor
has framed the charge under sections 364, 366, 302, 404 and 201
read with section 120B of Indian Penal Code. In addition, charge
under sections 364, 366, 397, 302, 404 and 201 was framed along
with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. In this regard, it is the
submission on behalf of the prosecution that section 120B being
an independent punishable offence, if this offence is proved,
section 34 of I.P.C. need not be considered.
15] In the present case, the prosecution in order to prove
the guilt of the accused, has examined thirty seven witnesses in
all. Those are as below :
1} Sou. Alka Rajaram Gunjal as P.W.1 vide Exh.75, who is a
panch witness on inquest panchnama Exh.76.
2} Shivaji Khandu Bhambure as P.W.2 vide Exh.77, who is a
panch witness on spot panchnama Exh.78 and seizure
panchnama of clothes of the deceased Exh.79 and seizure
panchnama about seizure of Sandal Exh.80.
3} Topaji Pillaji Nandedkar as P.W.3 vide Exh.82, who was
working as a sweeper at Rural Hospital, Khed and who has
8
produced the Sandal of deceased Nayana Pujari in police
station.
4} Vivek Nandkumar Sadare as P.W.4 vide Exh.84, who had
taken photographs of the dead body of Nayana Pujari
Exh. 85A to Exh. 85H and Exh.85I and 85M.
5} A.P.I. Rohidas Harishchandra Chikate as P.W.5 vide

Exh.103, who has lodged report Exh.104 with Khed police
station and who has drawn rough sketch Exh.106 of the
spot of the incidence.
6} Sanjay Parshuram Girulkar as P.W.6 vide Exh.118, who is a
panch witness on memorandum statement Exh.119 of the
accused Vishwas Kadam and memorandum panchnama
Exh.120.
7} Pramod Rohidas Agarwal as P.W.7 vide Exh.125, who is a
accused Mahesh Thakur and panchnama Exh.127. He is
also a panch witness on memorandum statement Exh.128 of
the accused Yogesh Raut and panchnama Exh.129.
8} Chandansingh alias Mangalsingh Harisingh Thakur as P.W.8
vide Exh.131 with whom the accused Vishwas Kadam had
kept gold bangle of Nayana Pujari.
9} Giridhar Tulshidas Mohite as P.W.9 vide Exh.132, who is a
accused Vishwas Kadam and panchnama Exh.134.
10} Abhijeet Bhanudas Aradhye as P.W.10 vide Exh.138, who is
a colleague of deceased Nayana Pujari and friend of Abhijit
Pujari.
11} Jayram Ganeshprasad Pandit as P.W.11 vide Exh.139, who
has employed the accused Vishwas Kadam as a driver on his
Indica car.
12} Rahul Baban Patole as P.W.12 vide Exh.140, who is a panch
witness on panchnama about seizure of cash amount of Rs.
600/ from one Hanumant Modak, who received the
said amount from Mahesh Thakur.
13} Anil Laxman Sonawane as P.W.13 vide Exh.144, who had
taken out a black coloured carry bag from the basin of
Indrayani river.
14} Prakash Uttam Nimbone as P.W.14 vide Exh. 148, who is a
panch witness on panchnama Exh.149 about seizure of card
issued to Nayana Pujari about blood donation.
15} Vijay Hanumant Nanaware as P.W.15 vide Exh.154 with
whom the accused Vishwas Kadam has kept the bag
containing pant, shirt and knife.
16} Gaffar Mehaboob Shaikh as P.W.16 vide Exh.156, who is a
panch witness on seizure panchnama Exh.157 about seizure
of Log Book, seizure panchnama Exh.158 about seizure of
register and seizure panchnama Exh.159 about seizure of
Log Book maintained by the accused Yogesh Raut.
17} Rajesh alias Rajaram Pandurang Chaudhari as P.W.17 vide
Exh. 184, who is an approver.
10
18} Abhijit Ashok Pujari as P.W.18 vide Exh.190, who is the
husband of deceased Nayana Pujari and who has lodged
missing complaint Exh.191.
19} Bhakta Pralhad Shivaji Taur as P.W.19 vide Exh.195, who is
a panch witness on seizure panchnama Exh.196 about
seizure of the clothes of Rajesh Chaudhari.
20} Namdeo Narayan Kunjir as P.W.20 vide Exh.198, who is a
panch witness on panchnama Exh.199 about seizure of
mobile handset and diary and panchnama Exh.200 about
seizure of the motorcycle bearing No. MH14 BP 2375.
21} Sachin Bhausaheb Bhondve as P.W.21 vide Exh.202, who
had seen Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952 near Vadu
Fata, and who had also seen Nayana Pujari in naked
condition and one person (Vishwas Kadam) in the car.
22} Sachin Namdeo Waghmare as P.W.22 vide Exh.207, who
had seen Indica car No. MH14 BA 2952 near Vadu Fata,
which was giving upper dipper lights and who had also seen
Nayana Pujari in naked condition and one person (Vishwas
Kadam) in the car.
23] Santosh Babaji Kothavale as P.W.23 vide Exh.214 from

whose hotel one boy (Yogesh Raut) has purchased two
Bisleri bottles on 7102009 at about 1.30 a.m.
24] Jagdish Harishchandra Nimbalkar as P.W.24 vide Exh.222,
who has conducted identification parade on 23112009
and prepared panchnama Exh.226 and prepared certificate
Exh.227.
25] Dashrath Maruti Bansode as P.W.25 vide Exh.229, who has
conducted identification parade on 1012010 at Yerawada
Central Prison.
26] Dr. Prakash Vishwanath Dhongde as P.W.26 vide Exh.

233, who has conducted post mortem of dead body of
Nayana Pujari on 9102009 and issued post mortem notes
(Exh.234).
27] Chimaji Hema Madhe as P.W.27 vide Exh.244, who made
enquiry about missing Nayana Pujari.
28] Govind Yallappa Pawar as P.W.28 vide Exh.257, who has
deposited seized muddemal with C.A.
29] Subhash Punja Taral, as P.W.29 vide Exh. 260, who has
written missing complaint given by Abhijit Pujari.
30] Aslam Akbar Shaikh as P.W.30 vide Exh.262, who has

deposited muddemal to Kalina Laboratory, Mumbai.
31] Police Inspector, Caste Verification Committee namely

Karbhari Gangarai Handore as P.W.31 vide Exh. 274, in
whose presence the accused Vishwas Kadam has admitted
the guilt and in whose presence Vishwas Kadam was
arrested and arrest panchnama was prepared.
32] Police Naik Mayur Madan Suryavanshi as P.W.32 vide

Exh.279, who has carried out muddemal to Kalina,
Mumbai.
12
33] Police Head Constable Rajaram Govindrao Surve as P.W.33
vide Exh.282, who has carried muddemal to C.A.
34] Police Head Constable Deepak Dhondiba Gonate as P.W.34
vide Exh. 285, who has carried muddemal to C.A., Ganesh
Khind, Pune.
35] Police Inspector Sayyad Shaukatali Sabirali as P.W.35 vide
Exh.295, who has done parallel investigation under the
guidance of Police Inspector Sunil Pawar of Crime Branch,
Pune.
36] Police Inspector Vishwanath Dnyandeo Ghanwat as P.W.36
vide Exh.300, who has carried out investigation on
receiving previous papers of investigation to Khed police
station and
37] Police Inspector Deepak Shankarrao Sawant as P.W.37 vide
Exh.308, who has carried out material investigation in this
case.
16] The accused in this case in support of their defence

have examined 13 Witnesses in all, as below :
1} Dr. Vijaya Shamrao Sorate as D.W. No.1 vide Exh.376,
2} Medha Rajiv Saraf as D.W. No.2 vide Exh.377,
3} Sunil Vishnu Pawar as D.W. No.3 vide Exh.378,
4} Jaymala Anand Bhosale as D.W. No.4 vide Exh.379,
5} Rajendra Murlidhar Chavan as D.W. No.5 vide Exh.380,
6} Sunita Ashok Raut as D.W. No.6 vide Exh.383,
7} Manoj Ashok Raut as D.W. No.7 vide Exh.384,
8} Senior P.I. Satish Raghuvir Govekar as P.W.8 vide Exh.386,
9} Suresh Dattatray Kute as P.W.9 vide Exh.387,
10} Nitin Raghunath Kulkarni as P.W.10 vide Exh.388,
11} Vikram Walmik Sonawane as P.W.11 vide Exh.389,
12} Vishwajeet Madhukar Patil as P.W.12 vide Exh.393

(Dropped in the course of examinationinchief).
13} Police Officer Jalindar Dattatray Supekar as P.W.13 vide
Exh.394.
17] I have heard Shri. Harshad Nimbalkar, the learned

Special Public prosecutor appearing for prosecution. According to
him, Nayana Pujari was kidnapped, raped and murdered by the
accused No.1 Yogesh Raut, accused No.2 Mahesh Thakur and
accused No.3 Vishwas Kadam. Special Public Prosecutor Shri.
Nimbalkar has also filed written notes of arguments vide Exh.412.
He has placed his reliance on the authorities submitted with list
Exh.413 and 414.
18] Per contra, according to learned counsel Shri. Aloor for
the accused, the accused have not committed any offence as
alleged, but it is the approver and his friends namely Sachin and
Sagar, who have committed the offences and implicated the
present accused falsely in this case. Advocate Shri. Aloor has also
filed written notes of Arguments vide Exh. 410. He has placed his
reliance on the authorities submitted with list Exh.411.
14
19] On perusal of evidence on record and upon hearing

rival submissions of both the parties, following points arise for
consideration and determination and I have recorded my findings
against them for the reasons stated thereafter.
Sr. POINTS FINDINGS

NOS.
1] Does prosecution prove that on 710 In affirmative.
2009 at 20.00 hours at Kharadi
Mundhava bypass road, Kharadi, Pune,
accused No.1 to 3 agreed to do or cause
to be done an illegal act to abduct and
commit rape on Nayana Abhijit Pujari, to
commit robbery of her ATM card and
ornaments and to commit dishonest
misappropriation of property belonging
to her ?
2] Does prosecution prove that on the above In negative.
said date, time and place and during the
course of same transaction and in
pursuance of aforesaid criminal
conspiracy, accused No.1 to 3 abducted
Nayana Abhijit Pujari in Indica car No.
MH14 BA 2952 in order that she might
be murdered?

3] Does prosecution prove that on the above In affirmative.
said date, time and place and during the
course of same transaction, accused No.1
to 3 in pursuance of criminal conspiracy
abducted Nayana Pujari in Indica car
bearing No. MH14 BA 2952 ?

4] Does prosecution prove that accused In affirmative.
No.1 to 3 along with approver Rajesh
Chaudhari on the above said date and
time while in Indica car bearing No. MH
14 BA 2952 at the open ground near

Shankar Parvati Mangal Karyalaya,
Wagholi, Tal. Haveli, Dist. Pune, in
pursuance of criminal conspiracy hatched
between them committed gang rape on
Nayana Pujari ?

5] Does prosecution prove that accused In negative.
time on the open ground near Shankar
Parvati Mangal Karyalaya at Wagholi,
Tal. Haveli, Dist. Pune, committed
robberty of ATM card, gold bangle, wrist
watch of Nayana Pujari and withdrawn
cash amount of Rs.61,000/ from ATM
machines at Viman Nagar, Kalyani Nagar
and Khadki Bazaar and voluntarily
caused hurt to said Nayana Pujari while
committing robbery ?

time at the open ground near Shankar
Parvati Mangal Karyalaya, Wagholi,
committed robbery of ATM card and gold
bangle and wrist watch of Nayana Pujari
and withdrawn cash amount of
Rs.61,000/ from ATM machines at
Viman Nagar, Kalyani Nagar and Khadki
Bazaar and at the time of committing
such robbery used deadly weapon i.e.
knife ?

Chaudhari on the above said date at
Jarewadi Fata, Wafgaon road, Tal. Khed,
District Pune, in pursuance of criminal
16
conspiracy hatched between them did

commit murder by intentionally causing
the death of Nayana Pujari ?

District Pune, in pursuance of criminal
conspiracy hatched between them
dishonestly misappropriated gold bangle
and wrist watch belonging to Nayana
Pujari ?
9] Does prosecution prove that accused In negative.

Dist. Pune, in pursuance of criminal
conspiracy hatched between them,
knowing or having reason to believe that
an offence of abduction and gang rape
on Nayana Pujari, offence of robbery and
offence of murder has been committed,
caused certain evidence of the said
offence to disappear ?
10] What order ? As per final

order.
REASONS
Point No. 3,4,6 and 8 :
20] Points No.3, 4, 6 and 8 are interlinked with each other
and revolve around the same incidence. Those are therefore
preferred to be decided simultaneously.
21] Before touching to the merits of this case in relation to
section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, and other offences, at
the outset it has to be noted that after investigation, four accused
namely Yogesh Ashok Raut, Mahesh Balasaheb Thakur, Vishwas
Hindurao Kadam and Rajesh Pandurang Chaudhari came to be
charge sheeted for the offences punishable under sections 120B,
364 read with section 120B, 364 read with section 34, 366 read
with section 120B, 366 read with section 34, 376(2)(g) read with
section 120B, 394, 397 read with section 34, 302 read with
section 120B, 302 read with section 34, 404 read with section
120B, 404 read with section 34, 201 read with section 120B
alternatively 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Out of the four accused, one accused Rajesh Pandurang Chaudhari
turned out approver and he was granted pardon.
22] The prosecution has examined the approver Rajesh

Chaudhari as P.W.17. According to prosecution, P.W.17 Rajesh
Chaudhari is an eye witness to the incidence of rape and robbery.
I would therefore prefer to discuss about his evidence first.
23] P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari in his evidence has stated

that on 772006, he joined service in Group Four Security Guard
Services. As per the directions of the incharge of the company, he
had to work on the allotted spot. On 7102009, he was deputed
to Synechron Private Limited company at Kharadi bypass. On 7
102009, he had been to the said company. His duty hours were
from 3.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. At about 5.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m., he
received phone call from Yogesh Raut (accused No.1). Yogesh
said, “ xi xi djk;yk tk;ps vkgs] iksjxh vk.kyh vkgs ”. Then he
asked Yogesh, what is “ xi xi” ?. Yogesh said that whenever they
18
have sexual intercourse with any woman, they call it as “ xi xi ”
as code word.
24] This witness has further stated that he requested the
supervisor to relieve him at the earliest and the supervisor allowed
him to leave the office at about 7.30 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. Then he
left the office. When he was on the way to his house and reached
at Lohgaon, Yogesh Raut again called him on his mobile. He
stated that he has no vehicle for reaching at home and he asked
him to wait for him at Lohgaon. So, he (Rajesh) stopped there, for
about 15 minutes. He then phoned Yogesh Raut and asked him
why he did not come. Yogesh said that he got a vehicle and he
asked him to go to his house. So, he went to his home.
25] It is further stated by this witness that when he was at
his home at about 9.30 to 10.00 p.m., he again received a phone
call on his mobile from Yogesh Raut and he said “ iksjxh vk.kyh
vkgs] xi xi djk;yk ok?kksyh ;sFks ;s- ” He (Rajesh) said that he
cannot come. He also sent SMS to Yogesh stating that his mother
will scold him and he cannot come. Then Yogesh again called him
within five to ten minutes. He insisted him to come at Wagholi
and he asked him to bring the packets of condom. Then he
(Rajesh) spoke lie with his mother and told her that he is going to
Solugaon and he proceeded towards Wagholi by his motorcycle
bearing No. MH14 BP 2375. He purchased 8 packets of condoms
at Lohgaon. He called Yogesh and asked him as to whether he
should come. Yogesh told that they are at Lohgaon Wagholi road
and he asked him to come straight at Wagholi. So, he (Rajesh)
proceeded towards Wagholi. He found Indica car bearing No. MH
14 BA 2952.
26] Then Yogesh called him on mobile and asked him to
follow the Indica car. He followed the car. The car stopped near
Shankar Parvati Mangal Karyalaya on an open ground situate at a
distance of about 70 to 80 feet from Pune Nagar highway. He
(Rajesh) parked his motorcycle near the Indica car. There was
darkness. He went near Indica car. Yogesh Raut got down the
window glass of the front left side. At that time, Vishwas Kadam
was sitting on the driver seat. To the left side of Vishwas Kadam,
Yogesh Raut was sitting.
27] It is further stated by this witness that he had seen one
lady on the rear seat of the car in full naked condition and by the
side of that lady, Mahesh Thakur was sitting. That time, the head
of the said lady was on the thigh of Mahesh Thakur. Mahesh
Thakur was fondling her breast. Then Yogesh Raut got down from
the car. He (Rajesh) asked him, who is that lady. Yogesh stated
that she is a prostitute and they had brought her from Kharadi
Mundhava bypass.
28] The actual story about commission of rape starts here
from the mouth of P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari. He has stated that
then Vishwas applied condom, which he had brought and had
sexual intercourse with the said lady. That time, he was standing
near the car. Vishwas Kadam had sexual intercourse in the said
Indica car. Then Mahesh Thakur had applied condom and had
sexual intercourse with the said lady in the car. Then Yogesh
applied condom and had sexual intercourse with the said lady in
20
the car.
29] After having sexual intercourse, Yogesh took the piece
of cloth from the front side cabin box of the car and wiped the
semen and kept the piece of cloth in the compartment, which is
adjacent to the door of the driver seat. Rajesh has stated further
that during this period, he was standing near the car. The lady
was uneasy and she was totally in naked condition. Her face was
faded. She was crying. That time, he had also wish to have sexual
intercourse. So, he applied condom and had sexual intercourse
with the lady in the car. At that time, the lady was crying and
requesting them to let her go at home. He did not speak with her
and he came out of the car.
30] It is further stated by this witness that Yogesh Raut,
Vishwas Kadam and Mahesh Thakur were checking the purse of
that lady. That time, he had seen one ATM Card of ICICI Bank in
the purse. On that card, the name Nayana Abhijit Pujari was
written. As they were intending to withdraw amount from her
account, they asked her to state the code number of ATM. She
refused to tell the number. That time, Vishwas Kadam had taken
out a knife from his pocket, put it on the breast of the lady and
threatened to kill her. Then he (Rajesh) had taken out visiting
card of Group Four Security Company from his pocket and he has
also taken out a pen and handed over the same to that lady. The
lady was frightened and she was crying. She tried to write the
number on the visiting card but impression could not be put on the
card as she was frightened and crying.
31] Then Mahesh Thakur had taken visiting card and went
near the said lady. The lady stated the number “2428” and
Mahesh Thakur had taken the said number on the visiting card.
Then Yogesh Raut asked him (Rajesh) to give key of his
motorcycle, as he was intending to withdraw the amount from
ATM. He asked him to wait there and he said that they will bring
money from ATM. Then Yogesh Raut and Mahesh Thakur went
towards ATM on his motorcycle. He himself and Vishwas Kadam
were standing near the car. That time, the lady was lying on the
rear side seat in a naked condition. Then Vishwas Kadam sat on
the driver seat and he sat on the rear seat near the said lady. Then
they took the car via Loni Kand road towards Markal and parked
the car near Vadu Fata in darkness by the side of the road.
32] This witness has further stated that when they had
been towards Vadu Fata, during that period the woman was crying
and she was in totally naked condition. That time, he (Rajesh)
again had wish to have sexual intercourse with the lady. He
applied condom and had sexual intercourse with her. The lady
was crying and requesting them that she should be allowed to go
at home. Then Vishwas obtained condom from him, applied the
same and had sexual intercourse with the said lady on the rear
seat.
33] When Vishwas was having sexual intercourse with the
lady, he (Rajesh) saw one Tavera vehicle coming from opposite
side. So, he gave upper dipper light with intention that the driver
of the said vehicle should not see, what was going on in the car.
That time, the said Tavera vehicle halted in front of Indica car.
22
The driver and three persons got down from the said vehicle. One
of them was Sachin Bhondve, who was acquainted with him. So,
he (Rajesh) came out of the car. He hugged Sachin as he had
given upper dipper light and had apprehension that they may
assault him. Sachin asked as to what they are doing there. Sachin
and others came near the car. Sachin Bhondve opened the rear
side door of the car. He saw Vishwas Kadam in half naked
condition and Nayana Pujari in full naked condition. When he
saw them, he immediately locked the door. Then Sachin asked
him (Rajesh), who is that lady. He told him lie that they have
brought a prostitute from Pune. Then sachin Bhondve said that
they should not stop there, otherwise they will come in danger.
Then Sachin Bhondve and others went away from the said spot.
34] P.W.17 Rajesh has further stated that after some time,
he received a phone call from Yogesh Raut. He told that they are
bringing parcel of food from Sonali Dhaba and they should come
at Loni Kand. Then Vishwas sat on the driver seat, and Rajesh was
sitting on the rear seat near the lady. They proceeded towards
Loni Kand. At Loni Kand, by the side of road, Yogesh Raut and
Mahesh Thakur met them and Yogesh Raut handed over his
motorcycle to him. Then they sat in the car and asked him
(Rajesh) to follow them on motorcycle. At that time, Vishwas
Kadam was driving the car. On the rear seat, Yogesh Raut,
Nayana Pujari and Mahesh Thakur were sitting. Nayana was
between them. He (Rajesh) followed the car. The car was
stopped near Chandan Nagar bypass near Yadav Darga by the side
of the road. He stopped his vehicle near the car. Then he sat in
the car on the front seat by the side of the driver. They were

intending to have food in the car. They four started taking food.
They also offered food to Nayana Pujari, but she refused. He
himself and three others had food. When they were taking food,
Nayana was in full naked condition and she was crying.
35] After taking food, Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas came
out of the car. They were discussing with each other. That time,
he had seen the identity card of Nayana Pujari in the hands of
Yogesh. It was of Synechron Company. From the said identity
card, he learnt that the lady is working in the same company,
where he was deputed. So, he was frightened. He gave the
clothes of Nayana Pujari to her, which were lying under the front
seat of the vehicle, to wear. She worn the clothes. Then he came
out of the vehicle. That time, Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and
Vishwas Kadam started saying that as she is working in the same
company, where he (Rajesh) was working, she will identify them
and they will come in danger and therefore she should be killed.
That time, he (Rajesh) was very much frightened. He said to
them, “Do whatever you want and I will go at home”. Then
Mahesh, Vishwas and Yogesh threatened him that if he will tell
anything to anybody, they will kill him too. On the said condition,
they allowed him to go at home. At the time of leaving the spot,
Yogesh Raut gave him Rs.500/ and then he returned to home.
36] From this evidence of P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari, it

reveals that the first episode of commission of rape on Nayana
Pujari ends and the planning of committing her murder started in
the mind of Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam. As
24
per the evidence of P.W.17 Rajesh, he parted with and left the spot
after about 11.00 p.m. He is not involved in the further acts.
37] In this regard, Advocate Shri. Aloor for the accused,

has submitted in his argument that the credibility of evidence of
the approver P.W.17 is doubtful and his evidence is not reliable
evidence. Much stress has been given by Advocate Shri. Aloor
upon his submission that the approver Rajesh Chaudhari has not
made true and full disclosure of the facts and his evidence cannot
be relied upon. Advocate Shri. Aloor has submitted that the
approver Rajesh felt repentance about act committed by him after
two to three days of incidence, but he has moved an application
Exh.13 for tendering pardon after a long period on 2262010.
Drawing attention of this Court to the application Exh.111 dated
672012, subsequently moved by approver, it is submitted by
Advocate Shri. Aloor that the approver by moving this application
has prayed for making him an accused in this case and to start trial
against him stating that he was compelled to become an approver
by threats and by inducement by police. It is further submitted by
Advocate Shri. Aloor that the approver by moving this application
Exh.111 after recording his statement under section 164 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, retracted his submission made in
Exh.13 and this fact clearly indicates that his statement made
under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and his
application Exh.13 praying for tendering pardon on the requisite
conditions cannot be relied upon.
38] However, it has to be noted here that the application
Exh.13 dated 2262010 was allowed by my learned predecessor
as per order dated 1972010. The accused Mahesh Thakur has
challenged the said order in the Hon'ble High Court and the
Hon'ble High Court confirmed the order of the Sessions Court
dated 1972010.
39] So far as the application Exh.111 is concerned, the said
application came to be “filed” as per order dated 16102010 with
an observation that the approver cannot cast away pardon granted
to him and he needs to be examined as a witness by the
prosecution and till the Public Prosecutor certifies to that effect, he
cannot be tried. Here, it has to be noted that the order of the
Sessions Court dated 1972010 was challenged by accused
Mahesh Thakur before the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble
High Court confirmed the order of the Sessions Court.
Consequently, in pursuance to the order dated 1972010,
statement of Rajesh Chaudhari under section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure was recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate,
F.C., Court No.5, Pune. The said statement Exh.187 appears to be
consistent with the evidence adduced by the approver and there is
nothing to state that the approver has suppressed certain material
facts and has not made true and complete disclosure of the facts.
40] In view of the order below Exh.13, which was

subsequently confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and the order
below Exh.111, there seems no force in the argument advanced on
behalf of the accused and the issue about tendering pardon to
Rajesh Chaudhari has been settled finally and he was examined as
a witness by prosecution.
26
41] The evidence of approver in this case is directly

concerned and privy to the offences to which section 306 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure applies.
42] In the case of State of Rajasthan Vs. Balveer @ Balli
& Anr., [2013] 4 Crimes (SC) 464, the Hon'ble Apex Court held
that :
“An accomplice being privy to offence – Satisfaction of
Magistrate is enough – Extent of accomplice's culpability is
immaterial – On grant of pardon, accomplice becomes a
witness and conviction can be made on his evidence.”
43] The object of section 306 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure is to allow pardon in cases where heinous offence is
alleged to have been committed by several persons so that with
the aid of the evidence of the person granted pardon, the offence
may be brought home to the rest. The basis of the tender of
pardon is not the extent of the culpability of the person to whom
pardon is granted, but the principle is to prevent the escape of the
offenders from punishment in heinous offences for lack of
evidence.
44] In the case of Khokan Giri alias Madhab Vs. State of
West Bengal, AIR 2017 Supreme Court 668, the Hon'ble Apex
Court held that “conviction can be based on lone testimony of
accomplice, if accomplice gives full account of conspiracy hatched to
murder and disclosing in detail part played by the accused persons,
his testimony corroborated by independent prosecution witnesses
along with circumstantial evidence is sufficient to convict the
accused. ”
45] In the case of Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary and

another Vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2000 Supreme Court
3352, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that “if testimony of
accomplice is inspiring confidence of Court and there is
corroborative evidence leaving no doubt in mind of Court
regarding involvement of the accused in commission of crime,
conviction of accused on basis of testimony of accomplice is not
liable to set aside.”
46] In the case of Piara Singh Vs. The State of Punjab,

AIR 1969 Supreme Court 961, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that
“corroboration does not afford the necessary assurance that the main
story disclosed by the approver can be reasonably and safely accepted
as true. It is well settled that the appreciation of approver's evidence
has to satisfy a double test. His evidence must show that he is a
reliable witness and that is a test, which is common to all the
witnesses. If this test is satisfied, the second test, which still remains
to be applied is that the approver's evidence must receive sufficient
corroboration.”
47] So far as the present case is concerned, as has been
submitted by learned Special Public Prosecutor Shri. Nimbalkar
even the evidence of approver Rajesh Chaudhari taken
independently is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused and his
evidence taken together with the other corroborative evidence on
record conclusively proves the case of prosecution.
48] As stated above, the approver is a direct witness in this
28
case, privy to the offences and it reveals from his evidence coupled
with the evidence of other witnesses that he has made true and
complete disclosure of the facts of this case and his testimony
passed the test of reliability and corroboration in material
particulars.
49] Having discussed about the evidence of P.W.17, who is
an eye witness to the incidence in connection with the offence
punishable under section 376(2)(g) of Indian Penal Code, and
whose evidence is direct evidence in this case, let us discuss about
the evidence of other relevant witnesses.
50] In regard to the incidence of commission of rape on

Nayana Pujari, the evidence of P.W.7, P.W.8, P.W.9, P.W.20,
P.W.21, P.W.22, P.W.23 and P.W.31 has to be discussed along
with the evidence of D.W.1 Dr. Vijaya Sorate.
51] P.W.7 Pramod Rohidas Agarwal, who is an

independent witness, has stated in his evidence that on 2110
2009, the accused Mahesh Thakur has given his disclosure
statement. He told that he will show the place, where he had kept
the clothes, which were on his person and the money which he
had. The writer of Police Inspector Shri. Ghanwat recorded his
statement. Then Mahesh Thakur signed the statement (Exh.126)
and he himself and another panch also signed the same.
52] This witness has further stated that the accused

Mahesh Thakur had taken them to his house. He had taken them
to the room on the left side of the hall. There were two cupboards
in that room, one was iron cupboard and another was wooden
cupboard. Mahesh Thakur opened iron cupboard. He took out

money from that cupboard. It was an amount of Rs.6,000/
comprising of one currency note of Rs.1,000/, six currency notes
of Rs.500/ and 20 currency notes of Rs.100/ denomination.
Then Mahesh Thakur opened wooden cupboard. He took out
clothes from that cupboard. He took out one white coloured shirt
with blue and white linings. The shirt was soiled. Right side
sleeve of that shirt was having blackish stains. Mahesh Thakur has
produced black coloured pant. On the left leg of that pant, there
were white spots. On right leg on lower portion of that pant, there
were reddish coloured stains like blood.
53] Mahesh Thakur also produced one underwear on the
front side portion of which there were white stains. This witness
has stated specifically that the clothes were separately wrapped in
brown paper. Labels with signatures of panchas were affixed on
those packets. Those packets were then sealed by applying wax
seal. The currency notes were put in the envelope. Labels with
the signatures of panchas were affixed on that packet. The
envelope was sealed by applying wax seal. Panchnama Exh.127
was prepared.
54] This witness has identified all the articles i.e. shirt
Article 36, full pant Article 37 and underwear Article 38 and he
has also identified the accused Mahesh Thakur before the Court.
55] It is further stated by this witness that when they came
out on the road, one more private vehicle was standing. Shri.
Ghanwat was there near the vehicle. Both panchas were called by
30
Shri. Ghanwat near that vehicle. The person sitting in the vehicle
told his name as Yogesh Raut. Yogesh Raut made a statement that
he will take out the clothes worn by him. He will take out the
purse of that lady and he will produce mobile phone and money.
He told that money means money came to his share. The writer of
Shri. Ghanwat has recorded the statement of Yogesh Raut. The
statement was then signed by Yogesh Raut. It was also signed by
both panchas and Shri. Ghanwat. The said statement of Yogesh
Raut is marked as Exh.128.
56] It is further stated by this witness that Mahesh Thakur
was taken by two constables by first vehicle. Yogesh Raut asked to
take the vehicle ahead by Markal Road. He led them to Golegaon.
He asked to stop the vehicle. He pointed out a person and told
that it is his house. Yogesh Raut took them in the room. There
was one iron cupboard in that room and by the side of it, there
was wooden cupboard. Yogesh Raut opened wooden cupboard
and took out an amount of Rs.11,000/ consisting of 12 currency
notes of Rs.500/ denomination and 50 currency notes of Rs.100/
denomination.
57] From that cupboard itself, Yogesh Raut took out his
clothes. There was a sky coloured half shirt. On the left chest
pocket of that shirt, the word “Wings” was written. Yogesh Raut
took out a blue coloured pant. At the front zip of front right
portion of that pant, there were white stains. On the lower side of
right leg of that pant, there were reddish coloured stains like
blood. Yogesh Raut has also taken out a saffron coloured banian
and brown coloured underwear. The clothes produced by Yogesh
Raut were wrapped in paper separately. Labels under signatures
of panchas were affixed to those packets. Those packets were
sealed by using wax seal. The currency notes were kept in an
envelope. Labels with signatures of panchas were affixed to that
packet and it was sealed by using wax seal.
58] This witness has identified the full pant Article 19, half
shirt Article 20, banian Article 21 and underwear Article 22, which
were seized at the instance of Yogesh Raut.
59] It has further been stated by this witness that Yogesh
Raut then told that he will take them to the place, where the
bag/purse was thrown. Then he had taken them to Markal road.
From there, he took them to Alandi. He asked to stop the vehicle
on the bridge of Indrayani river. He told that he had thrown the
purse and mobile phone in the river from that place. He told that
by keeping the purse in the black coloured carry bag, it was
thrown in the river.
60] Police requested 4 to 5 persons to go into the river.

From the nearby puncture shop, 4 to 5 tubes were brought. By
using those tubes, those 4 to 5 persons dived in the river. Those
persons had searched for the articles. One person by name Anil
Sonawane (P.W.13) found a carry bag at a distance of 10 feet
from the bank of the river. Yogesh Raut identified that carry bag
as the bag used for wrapping the purse. It was a black coloured
carry bag, whereon the word 'Jaihind' was written. On opening
that carry bag, brown coloured purse was found. The handle of
purse was of golden colour. One handle of purse was broken.
32
When the purse was opened, it found that there were two
compartments. On opening chain of one compartment, one pouch
was found inside. The name “Lock Lock” was written on that
pouch. Two tiffins of black and blue colour were found inside that
pouch. That compartment was also containing counterfoil of the
cheque book. The counterfoil was of ICICI Bank. The name
Nayana Abhijit Pujari was written in English language on that
counterfoil. Below that name, the address was written as
Synechron I.T. Tower, Kharadi.
61] Then another compartment of that purse was opened.
It was containing Titan watch of oval shape having golden
coloured belt and one identity card having photograph of a
woman. The name Nayana Pujari was written on the identity
card. It was also containing employee ID number as 1575. Blood
Group AB+ was written on it. The identity card was issued by
Synechron Company. The compartment was also containing a bus
pass of the bus. The Pass was having photo having the name
Nayana Phatak. It was containing three Bindi packets, a packet of
compact face powder, two strips of medicinal pills, one lip stick,
one key and 4 to 5 wet visiting cards. The purse was somewhat
wet.
62] It is specifically stated by this witness that papers

found in the purse were kept in one polythene bag and articles
found in the purse were kept in another polythene bag. Labels
with the signatures of panchas and with the signatures of Shri.
Ghanwat were affixed on those polythene bags. The
memorandum panchnama proved through this witness is at
Exh.129. This witness has identified black coloured carry bag

Article 23(1) and chocolate coloured purse Article 23(2) along
with it's contents.
63] P.W.8 Chandansingh Thakur deposed that he is

knowing the accused Vishwas Kadam from 2004. Vishwas Kadam
was working as cleaner on the container vehicle on which Vitkal
alias Lakhan was working as a driver. Because of his acquaintance
with Vishwas Kadam, Ramesh Wadekar employed him as a driver
on his Indica car. Indica car driven by Vishwas Kadam met with
an accident, after one to one and half year and hence by leaving
that job Vishwas Kadam took employment as driver with Jayram
Pandit.
64] This witness has further stated that in October 2009,
Vishwas Kadam came to his house. He gave gold bangle to him.
He told that he wants similar bangle to be made. He also told that
he does not have any money and therefore he (Chandansingh
Thakur) should keep that bangle with him. He kept that bangle
with him as Vishwas Kadam was his friend and as he was trusting
him.
65] It is further stated by this witness that on 9112009,
he received telephonic call from Vishwas Kadam and he told him
on telephone that he and his friends picked up a lady from Kharadi
and they committed rape on her and murdered her. He told that
now he is absconding, but he had given his licence to R.T.O.
Pimpri Chinchwad for renewal. He asked him (Chandansingh
Thakur) that he should collect that licence and send it to his
34
address. He also told that he is at Uttaranchal.
66] On 11112009, again he (Chandansingh Thakur)

received a telephonic call from Vishwas Kadam. Vishwas Kadam
asked him, whether he has collected his licence. On 12122009,
police and Vishwas Kadam came to his house. Vishwas Kadam
told him that a bangle kept with him is that of the said lady. He
told him that the name of that lady is Nayana Pujari and she was
employee of Synechron Company. On the say of Vishwas Kadam,
he had given the bangle to him and Vishwas Kadam gave it to
police.
67] This witness has identified the accused Vishwas Kadam
in the court and he has also identified gold bangle Article 9. On
16102009, Vishwas Kadam has confessed to P.W.15 Vijay
Nanaware about the said act. On 16102009 at about 6.30 p.m.,
P.W.15 Vijay Nanaware had received call from Vishwas Kadam.
Vijay enquired with him as to why police are searching him and
Yogesh in connection with murder of Nayana Pujari. That time,
Vishwas Kadam stated that from I.T. Park, Kharadi bypass, they
offered a lift to a woman viz. Nayana Pujari under the pretext of
dropping her at Hadapsar and had taken her towards Wagholi and
committed rape on her and killed her near Jarewadi Fata.
68] P.W.9 Giridhar Mohite has stated in his evidence that
on 17122009 in the morning, police asked him as to whether he
will work as panch witness and he had given his consent. Inside
the police station, two persons were there. One was Chavan, who
was a copanch and accused Vishwas Kadam was present there.
Vishwas Kadam told that he has kept his clothes and the knife in a
bag and that bag is kept with his friend Vijay Nanaware at
Chinchwad. Vishwas Kadam further told that he will take out
those clothes and knife. The statement of Vishwas Kadam was
recorded, which is at Exh.133.
69] It is further stated by this witness that on instructions
of Vishwas Kadam, they had gone to Vishal Mitra Mandal and
Vishal Paper Wachanalaya. Vishwas Kadam asked to stop the
vehicle at Guru Datta Flour Mill. He had taken them to room No.3
in the chawl made up of tin sheets. Vishwas Kadam gave a call as
“Vijay”. One person came out. Vishwas Kadam told that he is
Vijay. P.S.I. Shri. Sawant asked Vijay, whether he knows Vishwas
Kadam. Vijay told that he is his friend. Vishwas told that the bag
is in the house of Vijay. Vijay told that Vishwas Kadam had given
that bag to him in October 2009 at Pune station.
70] Then they entered in the room. Vijay gave the bag in
the hands of Vishwas Kadam. Vishwas Kadam opened that bag
and took out one pant, one shirt and a knife. The shirt was a half
shirt of pink colour, the left pocket of which was in torn condition.
The pant was of green colour and at the bottom of it's left leg,
there was spot of blood. The knife was having wooden handle.
The pant, shirt and knife were separately packed in brown paper.
Labels with signatures of panchas were affixed on those packets.
Those packets were sealed by using wax seal. The memorandum
panchnama Exh.134 was prepared.
71] This witness has identified the pink shirt Article 25, the
36
greenish pant Article 26 and knife Article 27. He has also

identified the accused Vishwas Kadam present before the Court.
72] P.W. 20 Namdeo Kunjir in his evidence has stated that
on 16102009, he was called at the office of Crime Branch, Unit 4
at Range Hills. At that time, police arrested three suspected
accused. On making enquiry, one of them has stated his name as
Yogesh Raut. Another has stated his surname as Thakur and third
has stated his name as Rajesh Chaudhari. Personal search of
accused Yogesh Raut was taken first. One Nokia brand cell phone
was found in the pocket of his wearing pant. On personal search
of Thakur, police found Samsung brand mobile in the pocket of his
pant and on personal search of Rajesh Chaudhari, police found
one Nokia brand mobile in the pocket of his pant. Police also
found one small diary in the pocket of pant of Mahesh Thakur.
Police seized all these mobiles and diary and affixed labels and he
has signed the labels. Panchnama Exh.199 was then drawn and
he put his signature.
73] This witness has further stated that after about half an
hour, police again called him for another panchnama. One silver
coloured Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952 was there. Police
Inspected the car in his presence. On opening rear side left door,
one white coloured stain on the rexin of rear side seat was found.
On the right side seat, police found some black coloured hair. The
police found one yellow coloured hair pin in which some hairs
were tangled and it was found on the mat, which was under the
driver seat. Police found one Log Book on the dash board in front
of the driver seat. In the Log Book, the pages running from 4501
to 4600 were there. Police cut the portion of rexin of the rear side
seat on which white coloured stains were found and kept it in a
plastic bag and then the said plastic bag was put in paper packet.
Police put hair pin in another packet. The hairs were separately
kept in third packet. All these packets were sealed and labelled
with signatures of panchas. Log Book was also wrapped in one
paper and labels with signatures of panchas were affixed and
police officer also put his signature.
74] It is further stated by this witness that motorcycle used
in the commission of offence by Rajesh Chaudhari was shown to
him. It was black coloured Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle
bearing No. MH14 DP 2375. Police seized it in his presence and
prepared panchnama Exh.200.
75] This witness has identified the Samsung mobile Article
2, Nokia mobile seized from Yogesh Raut Article 1 and Nokia
mobile Article 3. He has also identified the Log Book Article 33(3)
and yellow coloured hair pin Article 33+0+3.
76] Here, it has to be noted that the seized vehicle i.e.

Indica car and the motorcycle was brought in the Court for
identification by the witness. The witness has identified the
vehicle and he has stated that the number plate of Indica car was
previously with yellow colour, but now it is appearing with white
colour. However, the number of the car is same. He has further
stated that when the car was seized, at that time the sticker of
photo of Shivaji Maharaj was not affixed on the rear side glass of
the car. The seat cover cloth of the rear side seat is changed. The
38
Hero Honda vehicle is in the same condition as it was. This

witness has also identified the accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh
Thakur and Vishwas Kadam.
77] P.W.21 Sachin Bhondve has stated in his evidence that
on 7102009, at about 11.00 p.m., he was proceeding from his
village towards Tulapur Fata for taking dinner. Dhananjay
Jamadar, Rajendra alias Balu Chavan and Sachin Waghmare were
with him. They were proceeding by his Tavera vehicle.
Dhananjay Jamadar was driving the vehicle. When they came
near Vadu Fata, he saw one Indica car on the road and the driver
was giving upper and dipper lights. The Indica car was standing
stationary. As the driver of Indica car was giving upper and dipper
lights, the eyes of driver of Tavera were blinked and he became
annoyed. The driver of Tavera stopped the vehicle near Indica car.
Then Dhananjay Jamadar and all others got down and went near
the Indica car. Jamadar talked with the driver of Indica car, who
got down from the car and asked him as to why he is giving upper
and dipper lights. The driver then hugged him out of fear that
they may assault him and he stated that he knows him and he
said, “Sachinbhau I know you” .
78] This witness has further stated that he was knowing

the said driver as he was working as watchman in Hegar
Company. He asked him, who is in the car and why he stopped
there. He said that they have brought a prostitute and his friends
are inside the car. So, he proceeded near the car and opened the
rear side right door of Indica car. He saw one boy sitting in the
car and he saw a lady, who was in naked condition. The boy had
worn only a pant. So, he immediately closed the door and came
aside. It is specifically stated by this witness that he was knowing
the boy, who was sitting on the driver seat of Indica car and he
was Rajesh Chaudhari. Then he talked to Rajesh and asked him to
go away stating that he may come in danger. On enquiry, he
(Rajesh) told that his friend Vishwas Kadam is inside the car with
the said lady. Then he along with his friends went away from the
spot and Rajesh and his friend Vishwas Kadam also moved from
the said spot.
79] P.W.22 Sachin Waghmare, who was along with P.W.21
Sachin Bhondve has also stated somewhat similar facts and the
evidence of P.W.21 and P.W.22 appears to be consistent with each
other. In the evidence of P.W.22, it is brought on record that on
opening the door of Indica car, they saw one male in half naked
condition and one fully naked lady sitting behind. He has also
stated that Rajesh Chaudhari told that the male person is his
friend and the woman is a prostitute from Pune.
80] P.W.23 Santosh Babaji Kothavale has stated that in the
year 2009, he was running hotel business in the name and style
“Shiv Malhar” at village Dhavadi. On 7102009, he was in the
hotel. At about 1.30 a.m., one boy had been to his hotel and he
asked him to give two Bislery bottles. He was short having
blackish complexion and had worn light blue coloured shirt and
blue coloured Jeans pant. He had come to the hotel by Indica car.
He (Santosh) handed over two Bislery bottles and obtained
Rs.25/. One currency note was of Rs.20/ and another was of
Rs.5/. The currency note of Rs.20/ was little bit torn and he
40
returned the note to the said boy. On that count, some

altercations happened between him and the said boy. So, he
asked him to return the bottle and take away the amount. Then
the boy took 20 rupees note and handed over two currency notes
of Rs.10/ denomination each. The boy then went away by Indica
car in the direction of Khed Rajgurunagar. He has specifically
stated that he had seen the colour of Indica car. It was silver
coloured and it was bearing yellow coloured number plate on the
rear side. This witness has identified the boy in the Court, who is
accused Yogesh Raut.
81] P.W.31 Police Inspector Shri. K.G. Handore has stated
in his evidence that Vishwas Kadam told that Yogesh Raut,
Chaudhari, Thakur and he himself had kidnapped a lady from
Kharadi bypass, they had committed rape on her in the vehicle and
killed her by pressing her neck in the vehicle. He also told that
they have thrown away the body in the area of Rajgurunagar,
Khed by smashing her head by stone.
82] In this regard, it is material to note that the accused
Vishwas Kadam, who was absconding for two months from the
date of incidence has confessed about commission of rape and
murder by himself and his friends to P.W.8 Chandansingh Thakur
and P.W.15 Vijay Nanaware.
83] From the evidence of all the above referred witnesses,
what comes out is that their evidence is in context with the offence
of commission of rape on Nayana Pujari by the accused and
subsequently killing her and the said evidence appears to be
consistent with each other and there is no scope to doubt about
the testimony of the witnesses.
84] On appraisal of evidence of the above referred

witnesses, it reveals that the accused Mahesh Thakur has given his
disclosure statement, which resulted in recovery of an amount of
Rs.6,000 and recovery of clothes. The accused Yogesh Raut has
given his disclosure statement and it resulted in recovery of an
amount of Rs.11,000/ and recovery of clothes. The accused
Vishwas Kadam made disclosure statement to P.W.8 and P.W.15
and has also given confessional statements to these witnesses. The
disclosure statement of accused Vishwas Kadam resulted in
recovery of gold bangle Article 9 and clothes and knife. The
relevant panchnamas are also proved through these witnesses and
the evidence of these witnesses being cogent and consistent with
each other, relying on the said evidence, it can safely be said that
the prosecution through the evidence of these witnesses has
established the facts and circumstances, which are sufficient to
prove the offence of commission of rape by all the three accused.
85] In this regard, Advocate Shri. Aloor for the accused has
submitted that extra judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence
and the same cannot be relied upon, unless there is substantive
corroborative evidence. However, as has been submitted by
learned Spl. P.P. Shri. Nimbalkar, the prosecution case is bolstered
by extra judicial confession of Vishwas Kadam and Yogesh Raut.
There is neither any rule of law nor of prudence that evidence
furnished by extra judicial confession cannot be relied upon unless
corroborated by some other credible evidence.
42
86] In the instant case, the evidence about extra judicial

confession comes from the mouth of witnesses P.W.8 and P.W.15,
who appear to be unbiased, not even remotely inimical to the
accused and nothing comes out from their evidence, which may
tend to indicate that they may have a motive for attributing any
untruthful statement to the accused. Their evidence is in clear
words without any ambiguity and unmistakably convey that the
accused are the perpetrator of the crime.
87] Here, it would not be out of place to state that it is not
open to any Court to start with presumption that extra judicial
confession is a weak type of evidence. After testing the evidence
of P.W.8 and P.W.15 on the touch stone of the evidence tendered
by other witnesses in this case affirms the credibility of the
prosecution case. The significant thing to be noted here is that
both the confessions made by Vishwas Kadam were made to his
friends P.W.8 and P.W.15 on whom he has trust and in spite of the
fact that accused Vishwas Kadam was their friend, both of them
have stated about confessional statement made by him to them.
This fact itself suggest that the story put forth by prosecution is
true and reliable. In this matter, it is clearly seen that P.W.8 and
P.W.15 had NO AXE TO GRIND and extra judicial confession made
by Vishwas Kadam thus inspire confidence and it is fully reliable
and trustworthy.
88] In the case of Baskaran and another Vs. State of

Tamil Nadu, [2014] 2 Crimes (SC) 202, relied upon by
prosecution, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that :
“An extra judicial confession can be relied upon only if the
same is voluntary and true and made in a fit state of mind.
The value of the evidence as to the confession like any other
evidence depends upon the veracity of the witness to whom
it has been made. The value of the evidence as to the
confession on the reliability of the witness who gives the
evidence. But it is not open to any Court to start with the
presumption that extra judicial confession is insufficient to
convict the accused even though it is supported by the other
circumstantial evidence and corroborated by independent
witness. The Courts cannot be unmindful of the legal
position that even if the evidence relating to extra judicial
confession is found credible after being tested on the touch
stone of credibility and acceptability, it can solely form the
basis of conviction.”
89] In the case of State of U.P. Vs. M.K. Anthony, AIR

1985 Supreme Court 48, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that “if
confession is made by a person to his close friend and evidence of
friend found trustworthy, conviction on that basis is proper. If the
evidence of extra judicial confession is trustworthy and beyond
reproach, the same can be relied upon and the conviction can be
awarded.”
90] These authorities relied upon by prosecution definitely
assist the prosecution case and as stated above, P.W.8 and P.W.15
in the instant case though are the friends of Vishwas Kadam have
deposed against him and this itself is sufficient to rely upon their
evidence.
44
91] In regard to the offence of rape, the evidence of

P.W.26 Dr. P.V. Dhongde also needs to be considered. This is a
witness, who has conducted post mortem on dead body of Nayana
Abhijit Pujari on 9102009. As per his evidence, on examination,
he found that the body was well nourished. Rigor Mortis was not
present. Right eye was injured. Tongue was inside mouth and
bleeding from mouth was present. There was clinching of both the
hands fists. He found the following external injuries :
i) CLW over frontal part of head on right side extending to right
parietal, temporal, maxillalry bones with irregular fracture of all
above four bones exposing brain matters measuring 17 x 8 cm.
ii) Ligature mark on anterior aspect of neck extending on both

lateral sides and posterior aspect also measuring 35 x 1.5
iii) Multiple contusion marks on both upper and lower extremities
( apps. 15 to 20) and anterior aspect of chest.
All these injuries were ante mortem.
92] On internal examination, he found the following

injuries :
i) CLW over frontal part of head on right side extending to

right parietal, temporal, maxillary bones with irregular
fracture of all above four bones exposing brain matters
measuring 17 x 8 cm.
ii) Skull not opened.
iii) Both the lungs were congested.
iv) Heart was empty,
Right upper incisors and connine teeth were loose and
there were bleeding in gums.
93] This witness in his evidence has stated that injury No.2
i.e. ligature mark is possible earlier to injury No.1 and injury No.1
along with internal damage is sufficient to cause death. He has
also stated specifically that injury mentioned in Column No.17 at
Sr. No.3 i.e. “Multiple contusion marks on both upper and lower
extremities ( apps. 15 to 20) and anterior aspect of chest” suggests
that there was struggle by the victim while resisting sexual assault.
He has also stated that external injury No.2 can be possible and
injury No.3 is possible due to sexual act, if a person overpowered
the victim. This evidence of P.W.26 supports the case of
prosecution in regard to the aspect of commission of rape on
Nayana Pujari.
94] In this regard, Shri. Aloor, learned counsel for the

accused, has submitted in his argument that the post mortem
report Exh. 234 is silent on the point of rape or on the point of
sexual assault and gynaecological examination of the deceased
was not done at the time of post mortem. Advocate Shri. Aloor
has examined Dr. Vijaya Sorate as D.W.1 in order to prove the true
facts on record. Looking to the evidence of Dr. Vijaya Sorate, it
reveals that she was present along with P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde at the
time of post mortem. She has stated in her evidence that there is
mention in the post mortem report about gynaecological
examination part in Column No.15. She has also stated that a lot
of vaginal secretion was there and vaginal swab was taken. In
post mortem report, findings in respect of rape are given. She has
also stated that there were so many external injuries all over the
46
body of deceased. Considering this evidence, the argument

advanced on behalf of the accused that the post mortem report is
silent about gynaecological part and there is no finding in respect
of rape, seems not acceptable.
95] Here, it is material to note that it is brought on record
in the crossexamination of this witness that she was assisting Dr.
Dhongde (P.W.26) at the time of post mortem and whatever
injuries were noted by her and Shri. Dhongde are mentioned in
post mortem report. This witness has identified the photographs
Exh.85A to 85M. Not only this, it is brought on record in the
crossexamination of this witness by way of admission that injury
mentioned at Sr. No.3 in Column No.17 of post mortem report are
possible, if there was a struggle by the victim while resisting sexual
assault. It is also brought on record by way of admission that
injury No. 3 along with finding about vaginal discharge suggests
that it was a case of sexual assault and rape.
96] In view of suggestions put to the witness in her cross
examination and in view of admissions brought on record
accordingly, nothing remain to show that there was sexual assault
on Nayana Pujari and the relevant injuries mentioned in post
mortem report are due to struggle by the victim while resisting
such sexual assault. Thus, in the present case, the accused by
examining D.W.1 Dr. Vijaya Sorate as a defence witness has
supported and strengthened the prosecution case and it is made
crystal clear from the evidence of P.W.26 coupled with the
evidence of D.W.1 that there was commission of rape on deceased
Nayana Pujari.
97] Now diverting to the aspect of preparation of inquest
panchnama, spot panchnama etc., it has to be noted that the
prosecution by examining the relevant independent panch
witnesses have proved all the necessary documents. Inquest
panchnama Exh.76 has been proved by examining one Alka Gunjal
as P.W.1 vide Exh.75. In the evidence of this witness, it is brought
on record that panchnama was as per the situation of the dead
body and Shri. Chikate (P.W.5) has prepared the same. This
evidence of P.W.1 is supported by the evidence of P.W.5 A.P.I.
Shri. Chikate.
98] Spot panchnama Exh.78 is proved by prosecution by
examining Shivaji Khandu Bhambure as P.W.2 vide Exh.77. This
is an independent panch witness, who has stated that spot
panchnama was prepared on spot of incidence, which was at a
distance of 10 to 12 feet from Jarewadi road, near gutter. In the
evidence of this witness, it is brought on record that in the dry
gutter, blood stained stones were lying and those three big stones
were having large amount of blood. There was pool of blood near
those stones and on the earth. This version of P.W.2 not only
states about preparation of spot panchnama, where dead body of
Nayana Pujari was found lying, but it also supports the case about
existence of three blood stained big stones on the said spot
suggesting that Nayana Pujari was killed by means of those stones.
99] This witness has also proved preparation of

panchnama (Exh.80) about seizure of sandals of deceased Nayana
Pujari and seizure of clothes of deceased Nayana Pujari (Exh.79).
So far as the preparation of the panchnama about sandals is
48
concerned, it has to be noted that on 9102009, post mortem was
conducted on dead body of Nayana Pujari at Rural Hospital,
Chandoli, Tal. Khed, Dist. Pune. At the time of post mortem,
sweeper Topaji Nandedkar (P.W.3) was present and he was
helping the doctor. As per his evidence, he was asked to remove
the sandals of the deceased and he has removed the same
accordingly from the dead body. The sandal of the dead body
remained near the rack. He came to know this fact, when he went
there on 12102009 and he deposited the sandal with Shri.
Chikate in presence of two panchas.
100] As per prosecution story, the body was found at

Jarewadi bifurcation, Wafgaon Road and it was subsequently kept
at Dead House at Chandoli Rural Hospital.
101] Police wanted to take photographs of the dead body.
Hence, police called the photographer Shri. Vivek Sadare. The
prosecution has examined this witness as P.W.4 vide Exh.84 and
has proved the photographs of the deceased vide Exh.85A to 85
H, which are the photographs taken, when the dead body was
having clothes on it. The photographs Exh.85I to Exh. 85M
proved through this witness are the photographs taken, when
there were no clothes on the dead body.
102] Fact of preparation of inquest panchnama Exh.76, the
fact of preparation of spot panchnama Exh.78 is also brought on
record by prosecution in the evidence of A.P.I. Shri. R.H. Chikate,
who has been examined as P.W.5 vide Exh.103. The prosecution
has also proved the report/complaint Exh.104 and printed F.I.R.
Exh.105 through this witness.
103] P.W.6 Sanjay Girulkar examined by prosecution is the
witness in whose presence memorandum (Exh.119) of accused
Vishwas Kadam was recorded and recovery panchnama Exh.120
about seizure of gold bangle Article No.9 was prepared.
104] P.W.7 Pramod Agarwal is a witness in whose presence
P.I. Shri. Ghanwat (P.W.36) has recorded the memorandum
(Exh.126) of accused Mahesh Thakur resulting in recovery of
clothes vide panchnama Exh.127. By examining this witness, the
prosecution has also proved the memorandum Exh.128 of the
accused Yogesh Raut by P.W.36 P.I. Shri. Ghanwant resulting in
recovery of clothes vide Exh.129.
105] By examining Chandansingh Thakur as P.W.8 vide

Exh.131, the prosecution has corroborated the memorandum
statement of Vishwas Kadam in regard to the production of bangle
Article 9.
106] The memorandum (Exh.133) of accused Vishwas

Kadam recorded by P.W.37 Police Inspector Deepak Sawant
resulting in recovery of his clothes and knife kept with Vijay
Nanaware vide panchnama Exh.134 has been proved by
prosecution by examining one Giridhar Tulshidas Mohite as P.W.9
vide Exh.132. In this regard by examining Vijay Nanaware as
P.W.15 vide Exh.154, the prosecution has got the evidence of
P.W.9 Giridhar Mohite supported and has duly proved the
recovery of clothes and knife from the accused Vishwas Kadam.
107] The memorandum of the approver Rajesh Chaudhari

50
Exh.185 resulting in recovery of visiting card on which ATM No.
“2428” was written vide panchnama Exh.186, has been proved by
prosecution through the evidence of Rajesh Chaudhari himself,
who has been examined as P.W.17 vide Exh.184. The fact of
seizure of cash amount produced by Rahul Raut, the brother of
Yogesh Raut, is proved by prosecution through the evidence of
Police Inspector Shri. V.D. Ghanwant, who has been examined as
P.W.36 vide Exh.300. This witness has proved the memorandum
(Exh.301) of the accused Yogesh Raut and he has specifically
stated that the accused Yogesh Raut has shown the place of
murder of Nayana Pujari and panchnama was prepared on the said
spot, which is at Exh.302. In the evidence of P.W.36, it is brought
on record that on 21102009, the accused Yogesh Raut had given
disclosure statement voluntarily and has stated that he will
produce the clothes, which he was wearing and he will produce
the cash amount withdrawn from ATM card of Nayana Pujari and
he will also produce the purse of Nayana Pujari. The
memorandum of the accused Yogesh Raut proved through this
witness is at Exh.128.
108] It has come on record in the evidence of this witness
that the accused Yogesh Raut has produced one full pant of blue
colour having white stains towards right upper side and reddish
blackish stains like blood to the bottom of the pant. He has
produced sky coloured shirt. He has produced banian of saffron
colour and he has produced one underwear of chocolate colour.
Yogesh Raut has produced amount of Rs.11,000/ consisting of 12
currency notes of Rs.500/ and 50 currency notes of Rs.100/.
109] In the evidence of P.W.36 P.I. Shri. Ghanwat, it is

brought on record that ATM Card Article 24 of ICICI Bank was
seized from the accused Yogesh Raut. On 24102009, he seized
the receipt of amount of Rs.8,000/, which was deposited in
Sadhana Sahakari Bank by the brother of the accused Yogesh Raut
namely Rahul Raut towards the installment of loan repayment of
Indica car belonging to Yogesh Raut.
110] P.W.36 has specifically stated that Yogesh Raut had

given total amount of Rs.16,000/ to Rahul Raut of his share. Out
of this amount, an amount of Rs.8,000/ was paid towards
installment of loan and remaining amount of Rs.8,000/ was
produced by Rahul Raut in cash. He seized the amount and
prepared panchnama Exh.303.
111] The prosecution by examining one Rahul Patole as

P.W.12 vide Exh.140, has proved the panchnama Exh.141 about
seizure of amount of Rs.6,000/ produced by one Hanumant
Modak, which was paid by the accused Mahesh Thakur to him.
112] The prosecution has examined Anil Sonawane as

P.W.13 vide Exh. 144, who has taken out the bag/purse from the
river and this witness has identified all the articles found in the
purse of Nayana Pujari.
113] By examining one Prakash Nimbone as P.W.14 vide

Exh.148, the prosecution has proved that the card showing blood
group of Nayana Pujari was issued by Budhrani Hospital. The card
bearing the name of Nayana Phatak, Employee No. 1575 of
Synechron Technologies, has been identified by this witness and
52
the extract of register Exh.152 and 153 in that regard has been
proved by prosecution.
114] By examining Gaffar Shaikh as P.W.16 vide Exh.156,
the prosecution has proved seizure of Log Book of Indica car
bearing No. MH14 4658, which was being driven by Rajesh and
preparation of panchnama Exh.157 accordingly. Through this
witness the prosecution has also proved seizure panchnama about
seizure of duty register Exh.158.
115] Let us now discuss about recovery of incriminating

articles.
As per the evidence of P.W.19 Bhakta Pralhad Taur, on
17102009, clothes of approver Rajesh Chaudhari were seized.
The shirt Article 15, pant Article 16, banian Article 17 and
underwear Article 18 were seized and panchnama Exh.196 was
drawn in his presence. This witness has specifically stated that the
shirt and pant was soiled and it was having some stains. The front
side button of the pant was broken. The witness has identified
these articles before the Court and he has also identified the
approver Rajesh Chaudhari.
116] On 28102009, the approver Rajesh Chaudhari

voluntarily gave disclosure statement Exh.185 and has shown his
willingness to produce visiting card of Group Four Security
Company, which was given by the accused Mahesh Thakur and on
the overleaf of which ATM No. 2428 was written. As per the
evidence of Rajesh Chaudhari, he has taken out the said visiting
card on which ATM No. “2428” was written along with other
seven visiting cards from his house and handed over the said
visiting cards to police. Police seized the same in presence of
panchas vide panchnama Exh.186.
117] It reveals from the evidence of P.W. 36 Police Inspector
Shri. Ghanwat that accused No.1 Yogesh Raut voluntarily gave
disclosure statement (Exh.301) on 18102009 and shown his
willingness to show the spot, where ATM card of Nayana Pujari
was kept. Accordingly, accused Yogesh Raut showed the spot and
ATM card was seized and sealed.
118] On 12122009, accused Vishwas Kadam has given

disclosure statement Exh.119 and stated that he will produce one
gold bangle weighing 8 grams with Ghungrus. The said bangle
was seized and sealed from the house of Chandansingh Thakur
(P.W.8) at the instance of accused Vishwas Kadam and
panchnama Exh.120 was prepared.
119] The accused Vishwas Kadam has also expressed his

readiness on 17122009 to give his memorandum and has stated
that he will produce clothes and knife. These articles are seized
and sealed vide panchnama Exh.134 in presence of panchas
namely Giridhar Tulshidas Mohite (P.W.9) and Rajendra Vijay
Chavan.
120] Here, it is material to note that after seizure of clothes
of accused and seizure of articles belonging to the deceased, the
articles were sealed with wax seal before sending them to
Chemical Analyzer for examination. There was thus no possibility
of tampering with the evidence at any stage by any agency and
54
muddemal was received by Regional Forensic Science Laboratory,
Ganesh Khind, Pune. It has to be noted that the panchas on
panchnamas are independent persons and those are not habitual
panchas and the evidentiary value of panchanamas is therefore
affirmed.
121] It thus reveals from the evidence that the recovery of
respective articles on disclosure statement of accused Yogesh Raut,
Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam is made by police in presence
of panchas and the articles were seized, sealed, labelled with
signatures of panchas and then those were sent to C.A. All these
articles are definitely incriminating articles and the evidence in
that regard definitely goes against the accused persons.
122] In this context, let us now see what C.A. Reports say.
Firstly, it has to be noted that the blood group of Nayana Pujari is
'AB'. As per C.A. report Exh.344, the blood group of Yogesh Raut
is “B”. As per C.A. report Exh.346, the blood group of Mahesh
Thakur is “A”. As per C.A. Report Exh.349, the blood group of
Vishwas Kadam is “AB” and as per C.A. Report Exh.345, the blood
group of Rajesh Chaudhari is “B”. Coincidently, the blood group
of Yogesh Raut and the blood group of approver Rajesh Chaudhari
is the same. Advocate Shri. Aloor taking advantage of this fact,
argued at length and tried to emphasize that it is the approver
Rajesh Chaudhari only, who has committed the offences in
question along with his friends and there is no involvement of the
accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam in the
alleged offences.
123] It is also submitted by Advocate Shri. Aloor that Rajesh
Chaudhari had sexual intercourse twice with Nayana Pujari and he
is more cruel and he has committed heinous crime. Giving much
stress upon the fact that the blood group of Yogesh Raut and the
blood group of Rajesh Chaudhari is the same, it is submitted by
Advocate Shri. Aloor that it is Rajesh Chaudhari only and not the
accused, who are involved in the alleged crime.
124] To falsify these submissions made on behalf of the

accused, learned Special Public Prosecutor Shri. Nimbalkar has
drawn attention of this Court to the Chart Exh.338 and document
Exh.342. Here, I would like to reproduce the chart Exh.338.
Chart Exh.338 :
Locus Name Genotypes
Semen stain Semen stain Accused Mahesh Accused Yogesh Accused Rajesh
cuttings from cuttings Thakur. Raut Chaudhari.
back seat of from cloth
the car. piece found
at driver
side door
cabinet.
D8S 10,10 10,10 12,15 10,10 10,15
D21S11 28,31.2 28,31.2 28,31 28,31.2 30,31.2
D7S820 9,11 9,11 8,9 9,11 10,11
CSF1PO 11,11 11,11 10,10 11,11 11,11
D3S1358 17,17 17,17 16,16 17,17 13,16
TH01 7,9.3 7,9.3 8,9.3 7,9.3 7,8
D13S317 9,10 9,10 8,12 9,10 10,12
D16S539 11,12 11,12 11,13 11,12 8,12
D2S1338 18,18 18,18 17,23 18,18 18,23
D19S433 12.13 12,13 14.2,15 12,13 9,14.2

vWA 18, 19 18, 19 15,18 18,19 17,18
TPOX 9,11 9,11 9,9 9,11 8,8
D18S51 12,13 12,13 13,19 12,13 14,17
Amelogenin X, Y X, Y X, Y X, Y X, Y
D5S818 9,12 9,12 9,12 9,12 11,12
56
FGA 22, 27 22,27 23, 23 22, 27 21, 23
125] Looking to the chart, it is made clear that semen stain
cutting from the back seat of the car and semen stain cutting from
cloth piece found at driver side door cabinet match. It is also
made clear that the semen stain cutting matches with the semen of
accused Yogesh Raut and not with that of Rajesh Chaudhari. The
said document Exh.338 (C.A. Report) specifically states that for all
the different genetic systems analyzed with R.C.B., the DNA profile
obtained from controlled blood sample of accused Yogesh Raut
FSL MLC No. DNA 494/2009 exactly match with semen stain
cuttings from back seat of the car Exh.2 and semen stain cutting
from cloth piece found at the driver side door cabinet Ex.3. As
per the opinion of the Assistant Chemical Analyser to Government
Forensic Science Laboratory, Bombay, the controlled blood sample
of accused Yogesh Raut (Ex.2) and semen stain cutting are
concluded to be of the same biological individual.
126] As discussed above, as per the evidence produced on
record, the cloth piece found at driver side door cabinet was the
cloth by which the accused Yogesh Raut wiped semen after sexual
intercourse with Nayana Pujari. This being so, it can safely be said
that the involvement of accused No.1 Yogesh Raut in the
commission of the offence of rape has clearly been established and
the argument advanced in this regard by Advocate Shri. Aloor thus
finds no place.
127] C.A. Report Exh.341 states that three stones Ex.1, 2

and 3 were stained with human blood and blood group of Ex.2
and 3 was AB blood group, which is the blood group of deceased
Nayana Pujari. C.A. Report Exh.342 speaks that on Ex.4 i.e. cloth
piece found in the car and driver side door cabinet has few semen
stains and the blood group is shown to be 'B'. C.A. report Exh. 343
states that the blood on full pant of accused Yogesh and Mahesh is
human blood and it is having 'AB' blood group. It also states that
full pant, full shirt, banian and underwear of accused Mahesh
Thakur and approver Rajeh Chaudhari is also of 'AB' blood group.
The C.A. Report Exh.347 states that the results of morphological
and microscopic examination of hair is human hair. The C.A.
report Exh.348 states that full pant and half shirt of accused
Vishwas Kadam had human blood stains with 'AB' group.
128] The oral evidence available on record coupled with the
medical evidence and C.A. Reports go to show involvement of the
accused persons in the commission of offence of rape and this fact
is corroborated by the evidence of approver, wherein he deposed
about commission of rape on Nayana Pujari by himself and by the
accused persons.
129] In this regard, I find it necessary to state that the DNA
is an unique identity marker of every individual and despite
having the same blood group, no two persons can have the same
DNA. This being so, though the blood group of the approver and
the blood group of Yogesh Raut is the same, it cannot be said that
it is the approver only and not the accused, who are involved in
the offence of commission of rape.
130] Thus, in the present case, the oral evidence of the

58
relevant witnesses coupled with the seizure of incriminating

articles, medical evidence and C.A. Reports go to establish the fact
that the accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam
along with approver committed gang rape on Nayana Pujari on 7
102009 in Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952 near Shankar
Parvati Mangal Karyalaya at Wagholi, after abducting her from
Kharadi bypass near Reliance Mall under the guise of dropping her
to Hadapsar. It is established from the evidence on record that the
accused persons committed robbery of ATM Card of Nayana
Pujari.
131] In the instant case, sufficient evidence is brought on record
to show that the accused persons had taken out gold bangle of
Nayana Pujari from her possession and dishonestly
misappropriated the same. The bangle was kept with one
Chandansingh Thakur and the same has been produced at the
instance of Vishwas Kadam. It is also established by prosecution
that the accused persons misappropriated the belongings of
Nayana Pujari. Dishonest intention of the accused to
misappropriate the property is clearly disclosed and the offence
punishable under section 404 of the Indian Penal Code therefore
can be said to be proved by prosecution.
132] Besides, the surprising thing to be noted in this case is
that Advocate Shri. Aloor for accused while searching cross
examination of the witnesses at length running pages together had
given such suggestions, which instead of showing innocence of the
accused and instead of supporting their defence, support and
strengthen the case of prosecution.
133] Learned Special Public Prosecutor Shri. Nimbalkar

pointing out such suggestions put to the witnesses has submitted
that crossexamination on behalf of the accused in this case is
“suicidal crossexamination”.
134] In the crossexamination of P.W.5 Police Inspector R.H.
Chikate, it is brought on record that by means of Odhani, the neck
of deceased was constricted. It was suggested to this witness that
it was transpired during investigation that Nayana Pujari was
abducted, raped and murdered. It was suggested that all the
photographs are taken at one place only and that too prior to post
mortem examination.
135] In the crossexamination of P.W.7 Pramod Agarwal, it
is brought on record that when Mahesh Thakur was giving
statement, he himself and police were present there. Question
was asked to this witness as to whether Mahesh Thakur told the
name of Vishwas Kadam and Yogesh Raut and the witness
answered in affirmative. He has admitted in crossexamination
that when they had entered inside the house along with Mahesh
Thakur, his father remained outside. In his crossexamination, it is
brought on record that the television sets were in the cupboard.
He has stated in his crossexamination that he does not remember
whether for taking out seized clothes, Mahesh Thakur had taken
out all clothes, which were in that cupboard and he does not
remember whether from out of all clothes taken out at that place,
Mahesh Thakur gave two clothes. It was suggested to the witness
that when money was taken from that cupboard, that
compartment was containing gold, silver and other articles. He
60
has admitted in crossexamination that Mahesh Thakur had taken
out and counted those currency notes.
136] In his crossexamination, it is brought on record that
when they had been to the spot i.e. bridge of Indrayani river, there
was some water in the river. He has admitted that the accused
Yogesh Raut has pointed out the river by standing on the bridge.
He has stated that people were searching in the river for half an
hour and Anil Sonawane (P.W.13) found a bag in the said river.
He has admitted that after visiting Indrayani river, they all
returned to police station.
137] It was suggested to this witness (P.W.7) that he was
sitting in the vehicle by the side of accused Yogesh. He has stated
that he had been to the house of Mahesh Thakur from the police
station. It is brought on record in his crossexamination that it will
be correct to say that when he had been to the house of Mahesh
Thakur, at that time, Yogesh was not travelling with him by the
said vehicle. He has admitted that first time, he was going by the
said road, which was shown by the accused Yogesh. He has stated
that including himself about nine persons had been to the house of
accused Yogesh. It is admitted by this witness that Yogesh had
counted the amount on the spot and handed it over to the police.
138] In the crossexamination of P.W.10 Abhijit Aradhye, it
is brought on record that he was treating Nayana Pujari as his
sister and in that sense he was treating Abhijit Pujari as his
brotherinlaw. He has stated that he never proposed to marry
Nayana Pujari. It was suggested to this witness by showing
chocolate coloured bag Article 23/2 in his crossexamination that
this bag was regularly used by Nayana Pujari in the company and
the witness has identified the same.
139] In the crossexamination of P.W.13 Anil Sonawane, it
is brought on record that he was on the spot near the river for
about one and half hour and then he had been to police station. It
was suggested to this witness that the bag was searched out by
other swimmers, who were there and then it was brought to the
police station. It was suggested to this witness that he had been to
the bank of river as police had called him. It is brought on record
in crossexamination of this witness that on that day, at about 4.30
to 5.00 O' Clock, he had seen the accused Yogesh Raut and it was
suggested to this witness that after seeing the accused, he had
dived in the river. He was searching in the water for about half an
hour. It was suggested to this witness that when he reached near
the river the other persons were swimming in the river.
140] It was suggested to P.W.15 Vijay Nanaware in his

crossexamination that he had obtained cell number of Yogesh
from Vishwas and that Yogesh and Vishwas are his friends and
they frequently used to accompany each other. It is brought on
record in his crossexamination that whenever Yogesh and
Vishwas used to have party of meal, they used to call him
sometimes.
141] P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari was suggested in his cross
examination that after reaching to his home, he had pointed out
the cupboard to the police and told them that he has kept visiting
62
cards in the said cupboard. It was also suggested to this witness
that when he reached his house, the police were standing outside
his house. He entered his house, brought the visiting cards and
handed over to the police. This witness in his crossexamination
has admitted that Dhananjay Jamadar had identified him, when
his Tavera car was coming from opposite side and he had given
upper and dipper light and then he had come near the car and had
seen him. He was suggested that as his friends were in the Indica
car, he tried to stop the vehicle of Sachin Bhondve. He was
suggested that identification parade was held inside the jail and at
the time of identification parade, police was not present in the
hall. He has admitted that as Dhananjay had seen him at the time
of incidence, he had identified him. He was suggested that
Dhananjay had seen him, when he was standing outside the car
and at that time Dhananjay had also seen Yogesh Raut from closer
distance.
142] It is brought on record in his crossexamination that as
he was afraid that Sachin Bhondve and others will beat them, so
he stated them false that they had brought a prostitute. It is also
brought on record in his crossexamination that as the other
accused have threatened him that they will kill him, if he will
disclose anything to anybody, he did not disclose the fact that the
woman raped and murdered was Nayana Pujari and she was
working in his company. It was suggested to this witness that as
he was about to disclose the facts to police, Yogesh had called him
on phone and threatened him.
143] It is brought on record in his crossexamination that

during the period from 8102009 to 16102009, he had talk with
Yogesh on telephone. He has admitted that he had talk with
Yogesh for two to three times, after 8102009.
144] In the crossexamination of this witness, it is brought
on record that on 7102009, Sachin met him once only and it was
suggested that when Sachin had been to the spot, he himself and
his friends were in the said vehicle. It is brought on record in the
crossexamination of this witness that as he was afraid, he did not
disclose to Sachin that Yogesh and Mahesh were also
accompanying him on that day. It is also brought on record that
as Vishwas was with him, he had stated before police that he is his
friend. It was suggested to this witness that on the place, where
their vehicle was parked there was total dark. As soon as Sachin
left the place, he did not call Mahesh Thakur nor Yogesh Raut.
145] It is brought on record in the crossexamination of this
witness that when Sachin left the spot, they immediately moved
from the said spot and went towards Loni Kand. It was suggested
to this witness that his sexual intercourse with Nayana is the first
intercourse in his life. It was suggested that when he had sexual
intercourse with Nayana, she was weeping and she was requesting
him, not to humiliate her.
146] In crossexamination of this witness, it is brought on
record that in his presence, when Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas
had sexual intercourse with Nayana Pujari, they might have taken
15 to 20 minutes time each. It was suggested that that time
Nayana was crying. It is brought on record in crossexamination
64
that after committing rape on Nayana by all of them, she has not
stated that they should reach her at home. It was suggested to this
witness that as Nayana was requesting, Yogesh, Mahesh and
Vishwas did not rape her. He has admitted that when Yogesh,
Mahesh and Vishwas had sexual intercourse with Nayana, that
time he was not in the car and he was standing outside the car. It
was suggested to this witness that as he was standing outside, he
is unable to state as to when they had committed rape on Nayana,
and whether she was in partly naked condition or fully naked
condition. This witness has stated in his crossexamination that
she had seen them while they committed rape.
147] It was suggested to this witness that he had second

sexual intercourse with Nayana, after Yogesh, Mahesh and
Vishwas had sexual sexual intercourse with her. He has
specifically stated that prior to his second sexual intercourse with
Nayana, he himself, Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas had sexual
intercourse with her for one time each. He was suggested that at
that time, blood was oozing from the vagina of Nayana. He was
also suggested that when he was enjoying sexual intercourse with
Nayana, she was also enjoying it. It was suggested to this witness
that Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas had used condoms. They had
thrown away the condoms after its use.
148] In crossexamination of this witness, it is brought on
record that Yogesh has told him that he had brought a prostitute.
He was suggested that besides Nayana, one more girl was brought.
It was suggested to this witness that when Yogesh stated to him
that they are going to kill Nayana, he did not try to stop them. He
was suggested that after having two sexual intercourse with

Nayana, when he left the spot, he did not know what had
happened thereafter. He was also suggested that he cannot state,
after how many hours of his leaving the spot, Nayana died. It was
suggested to this witness that the vehicle, which was used for
committing rape on Nayana was shown to him in the Court
premises. He was suggested that he was knowing that the car was
owned by Yogesh.
149] It was suggested to P.W.18 Abhijit Pujari in his cross
examination that Abhijit Aradhye had love affair with Nayana
and as he had given proposal to Nayana, quarrel has happened
between him and Nayana.
150] P.W.21 Sachin Bhondve was suggested in his cross

examination that as he did not believe Rajesh, he went near the
car, he opened the door and he asked Rajesh the name of the
person, who was sitting in the car. He was suggested that Rajesh
has disclosed the name of Vishwas. In his crossexamination, it is
brought on record that photographs of different women were
shown to him and he identified the photograph P1 (photograph
of Nayana Pujari) from the said photographs. In the cross
examination of this witness, it is brought on record that at the time
of identification parade, he confirmed that the accused to whom
he had identified is the same person Vishwas Kadam, who was
sitting in Indica car on that day. In crossexamination of this
witness, it is brought on record that he was sitting on the front
seat of the vehicle and as the eyes of Dhananjay Jamadar were
blinked, first he got down from their vehicle and he asked the
66
driver of Indica car, why he is giving upper dipper.
151] In the evidence of P.W.22 Sachin Waghmare, it is

brought on record that when his statement was recorded, that
time Sachin Bhondve was standing outside. It was suggested that
Rajesh Chaudhari told them that they have brought a prostitute
and they should not come near their car. He was suggested that
only Sachin went near the car and by that time, all were standing
near their car. It was also suggested that Sachin saw what was
going on inside the car and thereafter he told them the said facts.
He was suggested that they opened both the doors of rear side of
Indica car and they had seen through the driver side door of the
said Indica car. He was suggested that when Sachin had opened
the door and when he saw a person from the rear side having
sexual intercourse with the lady, he immediately closed the door.
He was suggested that he had identified the person by pointing
out towards him with finger from some distance. He touched him
with his hand and identified him.
152] In the crossexamination of P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde, it is
brought on record that he has noticed injuries over the chest of
dead body of Nayana. He has admitted that there were injuries
over both the breasts of deceased and there were bluish and
blackish marks on the breast. He has admitted that for
ascertaining the time of death, the factum of stomach contents is
one of the criteria and he has stated in his crossexamination that
the death has occurred prior to 24 to 30 hours of post mortem.
153] P.W.27 Chimaji Madhe in his crossexamination has

stated that on 8102009, information was received to Yerawada
police station from Khed police station that dead body of unknown
lady in crime No. 173/09 of Khed police station under sections
302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, was found.
154] P.W.31 Police Inspector Shri. K.G. Handore was

suggested in his crossexamination that the accused Vishwas has
told that while committing murder, he has used knife. It was also
suggested to this witness that Vishwas has stated that he found
money while committing offence.
155] P.W.36 Police Inspector Vishwanath Ghanwat was

suggested by Advocate Shri. Aloor in his crossexamination that
without there being any evidence against Rajesh Chaudhari, he
obtained his police custody. It was suggested to this witness that
on 18102009, Yogesh Raut and Mahesh Thakur had given their
disclosure statements and that on 18102009, some recovery was
made as per the say of accused Yogesh Raut. It was suggested to
this witness that as per statement of Mahesh Thakur, he went to
the spot and made recovery. He was suggested that Yogesh Raut
expressed his willingness to give disclosure statement when he
was in police custody.
156] In the crossexamination of P.W.37 Police Inspector

Deepak Sawant, it is brought on record that on 13102009, police
papers in crime No. 173/2009 had come to Yerawada police
station from Khed police station. He was suggested that it was
transpired during investigation that there was no eye witness in
this case and while kidnapping Nayana Pujari and while
68
committing her murder, there was no eye witness. In his cross
examination, it is brought on record that Rajesh Chaudhari has not
told that these three accused had committed rape on other three
ladies and they committed murder of one of the ladies, after
committing rape. In his crossexamination, it is brought on record
that after interrogation of Rajesh Chaudhari, he found that Yogesh
Raut, Mahesh Thakur, Vishwas Kadam and Rajesh Chaudhari had
committed rape on Nayana Pujari. He was suggested that during
interrogation to Rajesh Chaudhari, it revealed that Yogesh Raut
after intercourse with Nayana Pujari had taken out piece of cloth
from cabinet of the vehicle and wiped his semen.
157] This witness has admitted that it revealed during

interrogation that the lady was requesting, not to do such act , but
they have committed rape on her. He was suggested that during
interrogation, it was found that Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas
checked the purse of Nayana Pujari and had taken ATM card of
ICICI bank. It was transpired during investigation that Nayana
Pujari has not disclosed the code number of ATM card and hence
Vishwas Kadam took out a knife from his pocket and touched it to
the chest of Nayana Pujari. During interrogation, it revealed that
Rajesh Chaudhari has given his visiting card and pen. Nayana
Pujari tried to write the number in frightened condition, but it was
not clearly impressed.
158] It revealed that Mahesh Thakur wrote the number

“2428” on visiting card. This witness was suggested that it was
transpired during interrogation that Rajesh Chaudhari sat on
driver seat and Vishwas Kadam had sexual intercourse by using
condom. It was suggested that it revealed during interrogation of
Rajesh Chaudhari that he had seen vehicle coming from front side
and he had indicated upper dipper light to prevent from seeing as
to what is going on in the vehicle, but that Tavera vehicle came
near their vehicle. It was suggested that it revealed during
interrogation that three persons including the driver had come out
from Tavera vehicle. One person by name Sachin Bhondve was
known to Rajesh Chaudhari and he (Rajesh Chaudhari) came out
of the vehicle. It revealed during interrogation that Rajesh
Chaudhari hugged Sachin Bhondve. Sachin Bhondve told Rajesh
Chaudhari that they should not wait there and they should go
away. It was suggested to this witness that it was transpired
during investigation that Yogesh Raut told that he will bring parcel
from Sonali Dhaba.
159] It was suggested to this witness that it was transpired
during investigation that Mahesh Thakur and Yogesh Raut had
given memorandum before panch witnesses and some clothes and
articles were seized. It was suggested that it was transpired during
investigation that the seized clothes were immediately sent to
Chemical Analyser.
160] From the suggestions put to the above said witnesses
in the course of their lengthy crossexamination on behalf of the
accused, the fact of presence of accused persons on the spot, the
fact of giving disclosure statements by the accused persons, the
fact of recovery of incriminating articles at the instance of accused
persons, the fact of preparation of panchnamas etc. is brought on
record. Not only this, but Advocate Shri. Aloor on behalf of the
70
accused in his searching crossexamination himself has brought on
record in clear words that the accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh
Thakur and Vishwas Kadam have committed rape on Nayana
Pujari. The fact of wiping semen by accused No.1 by cloth from
the cabinet of car etc. is also brought on record in cross
examination of the relevant witnesses. The fact of use of knife by
accused Vishwas Kadam is also brought on record. Thus, this cross
examination itself strengthens the case of prosecution showing
involvement of the accused persons in the commission of offences
in question. I would, therefore, state here that learned Special
Public Prosecutor Shri. Nimbalkar has rightly termed such cross
examination on behalf of the accused as “suicidal cross
examination” and in view of such crossexamination, no room is
left to doubt about the story put forth by prosecution and to doubt
about testimonies of the witnesses examined by prosecution.
161] Moreover, considering the crossexamination of the

above said witnesses, it would not be incorrect to state that the
incidence of commission of rape by accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh
Thakur and Vishwas Kadam along with approver is admitted by
them and nothing remain to be proved by prosecution.
162] Same is the case so far as evidence of defence

witnesses is concerned. While discussing about post mortem
report, it has been observed that the evidence of D.W.1 Dr. Vijaya
Sorate, who was accompanying P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde while
conducting post mortem has supported the prosecution case and
the fact of sexual assault and rape has been brought on record in
her evidence.
163] The accused have examined D.W.2 Medha Saraf vide
Exh. 377. She has been unable to state as to whether there was
ATM during the period from 8102009 to 16102009 and nothing
is brought on record in her evidence in support of the defence of
the accused in respect of withdrawal of amount by them using
ATM Card of Nayana Pujari.
164] D.W.4 Jaymala Bhosale has been examined vide Exh.
379. She deposed that ATM of Kalyani Nagar is there from 2010
and there is security guard and camera is also installed. If any
amount is withdrawn from ATM, camera clippings are available
for 40 days. In her cross examination, she has admitted that it
was informed by the branch manager that during the span of three
days i.e. from 7102009 to 9102009, CC TV and camera was not
functioning at the ATM Centre of Kalyani Nagar. If this is so, the
submission of accused persons that they have not withdrawn any
amount from ATM finds no place.
165] In the instant case, according to Advocate Shri. Aloor,
two F.I.R. are lodged and the accused gets benefit of this fact and
are entitled for acquittal.
166] In this context, he has examined Senior P.I. Sunil

Pawar as D.W.3 vide Exh.378. In his evidence, it is brought on
record that crime was registered with Khed police station on 810
2010 and the said F.I.R. had come to Yerawada police station.
Learned Special Public Prosecutor shri. Nimbalkar in cross
examination of this witness has brought on record that if dead
body is found within the jurisdiction of particular police station
72
and it is in respect of cognizable offence, the concerned police

officer of the concerned police station has to lodge complaint by
registering offence. As has been submitted by learned Special
Public Prosecutor Shri. Nimbalkar, there is only one F.I.R. lodged
with Khed police station, which was subsequently transferred to
Yerawda police station, and was registered with another number.
The contention of Advocate Shri. Aloor about lodgment of two
F.I.R. thus gets washed away.
167] D.W.6 Sunita Raut and D.W.7 Manoj Raut examined
vide Exhs. 383 and 384 are the mother and brother of the accused
Yogesh Raut respectively. By examining these witnesses, it is tried
on behalf of the accused to show that on 792010 and on 89
2010, Yogesh was ill and he was sleeping in the house. However,
as there is sufficient, substantive and corroborative evidence on
record showing involvement of the accused in the commission of
offences, this evidence cannot be relied upon at all.
168] By examining other witnesses also, no purpose is

served by the accused and nothing is brought on record to support
the defence of the accused.
169] Here, it has to be stated that sexual violence apart from
being a dehumanising act is an unlawful intrusion on the right of
privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her
supreme honour and offends her self esteem and dignity. It
degrades and humiliates the victim. A rapist not only causes
physical injuries but more indelibly leaves a scar on the most
cherished possession of a woman i.e. her dignity, honour and
reputation. Rape is not only a crime against the person or a

woman, but it is a crime against the entire society. Hence the
Courts are expected to deal with cases of sexual crime against
woman with utmost sensitivity. Such cases are to be dealt with
sternly and severely.
170] In the instant case, considering the story put forth by
prosecution and the evidence adduced by prosecution, one cannot
imagine the extent of mental trauma, which Nayana Pujari was
facing since the time of her abduction till her death.
171] Despite this, scandalous suggestions were given on

behalf of the accused to P.W.18 Abhijit Pujari, the husband of
Nayana Pujari. He was suggested that Abhijit Aradhye had love
affair with Nayana and he had given proposal to Nayana. It was
also suggested to this witness that though there were sexual
relations between himself and Nayana, Nayana was not conceiving
and so she was willing to marry Abhijit Aradhye. Suggestion was
given to Abhijit Aradhye (P.W.10) also that he proposed Nayana
Pujari to marry and on her refusal, he started treating her as his
sister. Putting such suggestions to the witnesses about a married
woman is definitely a strange thing. Not only this, Advocate Shri.
Aloor, learned counsel for the accused had given suggestion to
P.W.17, the approver Rajesh Chaudhari that when he was enjoying
sexual intercourse with Nayana, she was also enjoying it and by
putting such suggestion, Advocate Shri. Aloor had attained
extremity. Such suggestions in my view are not at all desirable
from any counsel, though defending the accused, more
particularly, a senior counsel.
74
172] Thus, in the case in hand, on appraisal of evidence on
record, it reveals that this evidence is sufficient to prove that
Nayana Pujari was abducted and raped by accused persons. The
evidence is also sufficient to show that the accused persons
committed robbery of money by using ATM Card of Nayana Pujari
and had misappropriated her property.
173] In view of the above discussion, I have no hesitation to
hold that the prosecution has proved the offence of abduction
punishable under section 366 of I.P.C., the offence of gang rape
punishable under section 376(2)(g) of I.P.C., the offence of
robbery punishable under section 397 of I.P.C. and the offence of
dishonest misappropriation of property punishable under section
404 of the Indian Penal code against the accused, beyond the
realm of reasonable doubt. I therefore answer Points No. 3, 4, 6
and 8 in the affirmative.
Point No. 7 :
174] So far as the offence of murder punishable under

section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the case is
based on circumstantial evidence. Hence, it has to be kept in mind
that the prosecution has to establish all the circumstances forming
complete chain of events leading to irresistible conclusion that the
persons, who have caused death of Nayana Pujari were the
accused only and none else, after abducting and committing rape
on her.
175] In the case of circumstantial evidence, it is settled law
that the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain the conviction
must satisfy three conditions :
i] The circumstances from which an inference of guilt is

sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly
established.
ii] Those circumstances should be of a definite tendency

unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused, and
iii] The circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain
so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that
within all human probability the crime was committed by
the accused and none else and it should also be incapable
of explanation on any other hypothesis than that of the guilt
of the accused.
176] In the case of Kashmira Sing Vs. State of M.P., AIR
1952 Supreme Court 159, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that
“in case of cruel and revolting murder, it will be necessary to
examine evidence with more than ordinary care lest the shocking
nature of the crime induced and instinctive reaction against a
dispassionate judicial scrutiny of the fact and law.”
177] Present is the case of cruel murder of a young married
woman, after commission of rape on her and the evidence of
prosecution therefore needs careful scrutiny. In the light of this,
touching to the evidence in the present case in regard to the
murder of Nayana Pujari, it has to be noted that according to the
prosecution, Nayana Pujari, a young software engineer working
with Synechron Company on the evening of 7102009 missed
company transport. Near Reliance Mall on Nagar Road, she
76
accepted the offer of lift by accused No.1 Yogesh Raut in the cab
driven by himself in which other two accused viz. Mahesh Thakur
and Vishwas Kadam were already sitting. They promised to take
her to her house at Katraj.
178] Nayana Pujari keeping total trust on these strangers sat
in the cab i.e. Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952. However,
the above said three persons taking advantage of the fact of her
being the only helpless woman in the cab, abducted her to satisfy
their insatiable lust. She was stripped naked and kept in that
condition for hours together, committing gang rape on her
repeatedly. She was perceived to be alive till about 1.00 a.m. on
8102009, and her dead body was found at Jarewadi Fata, near
gutter by the side of road, near forest on 8102009. On 810
2009, P.W.5 A.P.I. Shri. R.H. Chikate received information that at
Jarewadi bifurcation, an unknown dead body is lying. He
therefore went to the spot and prepared spot panchnama Exh.78
and inquest panchnama Exh.76. He also seized clothes of the
deceased and sandal of the deceased and prepared panchnama
Exh.79 and 80 respectively. Post mortem on the dead body was
conducted at Khed Rural Hospital.
179] As stated in foregoing paragraphs, approver Rajesh

Chaudhari, who was “participe criminis” left the spot from Vadu
Fata, after commission of rape, and thereafter Yogesh Raut,
Vishwas Kadam and Mahesh Thakur decided to commit murder of
Nayana Pujari.
180] The prosecution in regard to the offence of murder of
Nayana Pujari has kept reliance on the evidence of approver

Rajesh Chaudhari (P.W.17) and has tried to complete the chain of
circumstances connecting the evidence of other witnesses with the
evidence of approver.
181] The approver in the present case in his evidence has

stated that Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas were saying that as
Nayana Pujari is working in the same company, where he (Rajesh)
was working, she will identify them and they will come in danger
and therefore, she should be killed. He has further stated that he
was very much frightened and he said to Yogesh Raut, Mahesh
Thakur and Vishwas Kadam that they should do whatever they
want and he will go at home. Then Mahesh, Yogesh and Vishwas
threatened him that if he will say anything to anybody, they will
kill him too. On this condition, they allowed him to go. At the
time of leaving the spot, Yogesh Raut gave him Rs.500/ and then
he returned to home.
182] He has further stated that on 8102009, he went on
his duty. On that day, he was deputed to work at Cummins
Company, Kothrud. At about 11.30 a.m. to 12.00 noon, he
received a phone call from Yogesh Raut and he told that they have
killed Nayana Pujari at Jarewadi Fata by throttling with Odhani
and disfigured her face with intention that she should not be
identified. Yogesh also said to Rajesh that he has no reason to
have fear in his mind since they have killed her.
183] On 9102009, he (Rajesh) read a news in daily

Lokmat about murder of Nayana Pujari and he realized that
78
actually his friends Yogesh, Vishwas and Mahesh had killed

Nayana.
184] As it is established as a rule of prudence that

conviction can be based on the testimony of accomplice only if it
is reliable as a whole being intrinsically natural and reliable and if
it is corroborated by the independent evidence either direct or
circumstantial, connecting the accused with the crime, the
prosecution in order to support the evidence of approver Rajesh
Chaudhari, led the circumstantial evidence on the following
circumstances :
1) Motive,
2) Last seen together theory,
3) Extra Judicial Confession,
4) Recovery and Discovery of Incriminating Articles,
5) Test Identification Parade,
6) Medical Evidence,
7) C.A. Reports,
8) False defence.
Motive :
185] Motive is that which stimulates or incites an action: the
main spring of human action; some cause or reason that moves the
will and induces action; the moving power which impels to
action; an inducement or that which leads or tempts the mind to
indulge in a criminal act.
186] It is well settled that the motive assumes importance in
the case of circumstantial evidence. It is equally well settled that
the motive being locked in the mind of the accused, it is difficult
for the prosecution to prove the motive for the commission of the
crime by the accused.
187] Now in the present case, initially, motive of the

accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam was to
kidnap, rob and rape the lady Nayana Pujari and subsequently
developed motive was to murder her.
188] As discussed in foregoing paragraphs, the accused

offered lift to Nayana Pujari by falsely promising her to drop her at
her house and committed rape on her. They had taken her to
Shankar Parvati Mangal Karyalaya, Wagholi by Indica car. The
accused were tempted by insatiable lust and greed, which
motivated them to commit offence of rape. After having
succeeded in their motive of kidnapping and raping Nayana Pujari
and after seeing her identity card, they developed an apprehension
as to the possibility of their being identified by the deceased and
developed further motive of murdering Nayana Pujari in order to
escape detection of their ghastly offences.
189] As stated above, Rajesh Chaudhari was working in

Synechron company (deputed), where Nayana Pujari was also
working and the car of accused No.1 was attached to Zensor
Company, which is located in the same premises of Synechron
Company and hence they were apprehending about their identity
80
by the deceased.
190] Considering the evidence of the approver that accused
Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam have stated that
they have to kill the lady Nayana Pujari as there are chances of
their identification by her, coupled with the fact that she was
murdered and her dead body was found on next day at Jarewadi
Fata clearly establish the motive of accused to commit her murder.
Last seen together theory :
191] So far as the aspect of last seen theory is concerned, it
has to be noted that the last seen theory comes into play where the
time gap between the point of time when the accused and the
deceased were seen last alive and when the deceased is found
dead so small that possibility of any person other than the accused
being the author of the crime becomes impossible. In the absence
of any positive evidence to conclude that the accused and the
deceased were last seen together, it would be hazardous to come
to the conclusion of guilt of the accused.
192] In the present case, before analyzing the factual

aspects, it has to be stated that for a crime to be proved, it is not
necessary that crime must be seen to have been committed and
must in all circumstances by direct ocular evidence by examining
before the Court those persons, who had seen its commission. An
offence can be proved by circumstantial evidence also. The
principal fact or factum probandum may be proved indirectly by
means of certain inference drawn from factum probans i.e. the
evidentiary facts. Circumstantial evidence is not direct to the point
in issue, but consist of evidence of various other facts, which are so
closely associated with the fact in issue that taken together they
form a chain of circumstances from which the existence of the
principal fact can be inferred or presumed.
193] Let us now see whether the prosecution in the case in
hand has been able to prove that Nayana Pujari was lastly seen
alive in the company of accused soon before her death. P.W.17,
P.W.21 and P.W.22 appear to be prime witnesses on this point.
194] P.W.17 in his evidence after narrating the entire

episode about commission of rape by himself, Yogesh Raut,
Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam, has stated that accused
Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas said that Nayana is working in the
same company, where he (Rajesh) is working and she will identify
them and they will come in trouble and therefore she should be
killed. It is this stage where the approver P.W.17 parted with
Yogesh, Mahesh and Vishwas. It thus reveals from the evidence of
P.W.17 that he had lastly seen Nayana Pujari with the accused
Yogesh Raut, Mahesh Thakur and Vishwas Kadam, before he
parted with from the spot of incidence of rape i.e. after about
11.00 p.m.
195] P.W.21 Sachin Bhondve has stated in his evidence that
on 7102009, at about 11.00 p.m., when he was proceeding
towards Tulapur Fata for taking dinner along with Dhananjay
Jamadar, Rajendra alias Balu Chavan and Sachin Waghmare, they
had seen Indica car on the road near Vadu Fata. He has
specifically stated that on opening rear right side door of Indica
82
car, he had seen one boy and a lady sitting in naked condition and
the boy had worn pant only. On making enquiry with Rajesh, he
told that his friend Vishwas Kadam is inside the car with the lady.
Somewhat similar is the evidence of P.W.22 Sachin Waghmare.
Both these witnesses have subsequently identified the photograph
P1 of the lady whom they had seen in Indica car on that night. As
stated above, dead body of Nayana Pujari was found on 8102009
at about 4.05 p.m. and it can therefore safely be gathered that
P.W.21 and P.W.22 are also the witnesses, who had lastly seen
Rajesh Chaudhari and Vishwas Kadam with Nayana Pujari
together.
196] Here, it is material to note that none of these witnesses
are related to deceased Nayana Pujari and their evidence appears
to be truthful, reliable and acceptable.
197] P.W.21 and P.W.22 are the most natural witnesses in
this case and there is absolutely nothing on record to doubt about
their version. Moreover, P.W.21 Sachin Bhondve is the friend of
Rajesh Chaudhari and he is knowing him well and still he has
deposed against him and other accused. Thus, this evidence which
is worthy of credence can be given much weightage. His evidence
gains corroboration by the evidence of P.W.22 and what comes out
from the evidence of P.W.17, P.W.21 and P.W.22 is that till 11.00
p.m. or thereafter, Nayana Pujari was last seen in the company of
Vishwas Kadam and the approver Rajesh Chaudhari. These
witnesses have identified Vishwas Kadam and approver in
identification parade.
198] So far as accused Yogesh Raut and Mahesh Thakur are
concerned, it is the evidence of P.W.23 Santosh Kothavale, which
discloses their presence on 7102009 at about 1.30 a.m. at his
shop, for purchase of Bislery bottles. As stated above, P.W.17 has
stated that Yogesh Raut and Mahesh Thakur had gone by his
motorcycle and the evidence of P.W.23 thus gains corroboration.
199] Linking the evidence of P.W.17 to the evidence of

P.W.23, it can safely be said that the accused Yogesh Raut, Mahesh
Thakur and Vishwas Kadam were with Nayana Pujari after 1.00
a.m. also. Here, it is significant to note that the accused persons
have not offered any explanation throughout as to where they had
gone after Rajesh Chaudhari parted with and this is a strong
circumstance against the accused.
200] It is also significant to note here that on one hand

Advocate Shri. Aloor has tried to point out finger towards the
approver Rajesh Chaudhari to show his involvement in the
commission of all the offences. On the other hand, he has
suggested to P.W.36 Police Inspector Shri. Ghanwat that without
there being any evidence against Rajesh Chaudhari, he obtained
his police custody. It was suggested to P.W.31 Police Inspector
Karbhari Handore that the accused Vishwas Kadam has told that
while committing murder, he has used knife.
201] This crossexamination of the witnesses on behalf of

the accused supports and strengthens the case of prosecution in
regard to the aspect of murder of Nayana Pujari, at the hands of
accused persons.
84
202] While arguing this matter, Advocate Shri. Aloor has

submitted that the time of incidence of committing murder of
Nayana Pujari has not been established by prosecution and the gap
between the time when Nayana Pujari was lastly seen to be alive
and the time of her murder, which can be inferred from the given
circumstances being a big time gap, the accused persons cannot be
connected with the crime in question.
203] Now, as per prosecution story, Nayana Pujari was lastly
seen till 11.00 p.m. or thereafter. From post mortem report
Exh.234 and from the evidence of P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde, it reveals
that the incidence of murder might have occurred between 1.00
a.m. of 8102009 to 1.00 p.m. of 8102009. It cannot therefore
be accepted that during this time gap, more particularly, when it
was night time, there are any chances even remotely of coming
anybody else to the spot and chances of committing murder of
Nayana. The significant thing to be noted here is that since the
time of abduction Nayana Pujari was in the custody of accused
persons that too in a closed Indica car and it can therefore, by no
stretch of imagination can be said that any other person had been
to the spot, had an access with Nayana Pujari and had committed
the crime in question.
204] As stated above, the prosecution has established the

motive of committing murder of Nayana Pujari and it can safely be
said that those were accused persons only, who had committed
murder of Nayana Pujari, after committing rape on her with an
intention that they should not be identified by her.
205] In the case of Vasant Sampat Dupare Vs. State of

Maharashtra, 2014 (4) Crimes Supreme Court 337, the Hon'ble
Apex Court held that “matching of the blood group gains
signification. The incriminating articles namely stones smeared
with blood, the clothes and the blood group matching is an
important circumstance showing complicity of the appellant
(accused) in the crime in question.”
206] In the case of Mahanand Naik Vs. State, 2014 ALL

MR (Cri) 961, the Hon'ble High Court held that :
“Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Theory of last

seen together – Prosecution witnesses saying that deceased
was seen by them alongwith accused who had taken her in
luggage rickshaw – No explanation given by accused –
Accused denied each and every question about same – Such
denial can be taken as incriminating against accused.”
207] In context with the aspect of last seen together theory,
Advocate Shri. Nimbalkar placing his reliance on the above said
cases, has submitted that the prosecution by examining P.W.17,
P.W.21 and P.W.22 has established last seen together theory and
has completed the chain of circumstances by establishing other
relevant factors.
208] On the other hand, Shri. Aloor, learned counsel for the
accused, placing his reliance on the case of Nizam and another
Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2015 S.B.R. 394, has submitted in his
argument that the evidence of approver P.W.17 and the evidence
of P.W.21 and P.W.22, who are the chance witnesses does not
86
inspire confidence and the prosecution has failed to establish last
seen together theory.
209] In the above referred case relied upon by the accused,
it is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that in the case of
circumstantial evidence, circumstances indicating guilt of accused
should be fully proved. Such circumstances must be conclusive in
nature. All circumstances should be complete forming a chain
without any gap. Proved circumstances must be consistent only
with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused totally inconsistent
with his evidence.
210] According to Advocate Shri. Aloor for the accused,

there is big gap between the time of death of Nayana Pujari and
the time, when she was last seen together alive with the accused.
However, this aspect has been cleared by prosecution and as has
been discussed in foregoing paragraphs, there is no evidence on
record to infer that there was possibility of any person other than
the accused to reach to the spot of offence and to commit murder
of Nayana Pujari. Close proximity between last seen evidence and
death has been established by prosecution.
211] It is settled principle of law that when the evidence of
eye witnesses establish that the deceased was last seen with the
accused and the accused are not explaining the circumstances as
to when they had parted company with the deceased, last seen
theory gets established. In the present case, considering the
evidence of P.W.17, P.W.21 and P.W.22 coupled with the evidence
of P.W.23 in its entirety irresistible conclusion has to be drawn
that the deceased was last seen with the accused by the approver
Rajesh Chaudhari and by P.W.21 and P.W.22. Thus, last seen
theory has been established by prosecution.
Extra Judicial Confession :
212] As has been discussed in foregoing paragraphs, the

accused Vishwas Kadam has made extra judicial confession to
P.W.8 Chandansingh Thakur on 9112009 and to P.W.15 Vijay
Nanaware on 16102009 that he and his friends had abducted,
committed rape and murdered a lady. The accused Yogesh Raut
has also disclosed to Rajesh Chaudhari, who is his friend that they
had killed Nayana Pujari and he should be free from fear.
213] Thus, confessions made by the accused is a

circumstance pointing finger towards the accused showing their
involvement in the commission of the alleged offences.
Recovery and discovery of incriminating articles

belonging to the deceased and the clothes of accused
persons :
214] As the aspect of recovery and discovery has been

discussed in detail in foregoing paragraphs while deciding point
No.3, 4, 6 and 8, I do not find it necessary to have much
discussion in this regard and it would be suffice to say here that
seizure of articles of Nayana Pujari seized vide panchnama Exh.79
and Exh.80, seizure of her purse found in Indrayani river at the
instance of the accused Yogesh Raut vide panchnama Exh. 128,
the seizure of clothes of the accused, which were stained with
blood vide panchnama Exh.129 and seizure of cash amount from
88
the accused persons and seizure of sandal vide panchnama Exh.80
are material incriminating circumstances against the accused.
215] The thing of utmost importance to be noted is that the
seized stones i.e. the weapon of offence seized vide panchnama
Exh.78 was stained with blood and the blood group found on the
stone was 'AB', which was the blood group of deceased Nayana
Pujari. Another weapon of offence i.e. Odhani was also found
stained with blood of blood group 'AB'.
216] It is made clear from the evidence on record that

information provided by accused persons resulted in recovery of
articles of deceased Nayana Pujari and recovery of clothes of
accused etc. This recovery and discovery was direct outcome of
information provided by the accused. These facts lead to an
inference that in all probabilities having regard to the normal
course of natural events and human conduct, those were accused
persons only, who had committed the offences alleged against
them.
Test Identification Parade :
217] As stated above, P.W.17, P.W.21 and P.W.22 are the
witnesses, who had last seen Nayana Pujari alive with approver
Rajesh Chaudhari and accused persons. Rajesh Chaudhari is the
friend of Yogesh Raut and other two accused and there is no
question of identification so far as approver is concerned. P.W.21
and P.W.22 being chance witnesses and being natural witnesses,
identification parade was conducted by Special Judicial Magistrate
Shri. D.M. Bansode and these witnesses have identified the
accused Vishwas Kadam with whom they had seen Nayana Pujari
in naked condition. Report about identification parade Exh.231
has been proved by prosecution by examining Shri. D.M. Bansode,
Special Judicial Magistrate.
219] One more witness i.e. P.W.23 is a witness, who had

seen the accused Yogesh Raut, when he had gone to his hotel for
purchase of Bislery Bottles. This witness has also identified
Yogesh Raut in the identification parade (Exh. 231) conducted on
1012010 by Shri. D.M. Bansode, Special Judicial Magistrate
(P.W.25).
220] In context with the aspect of conduction of test

identification parade, it is submitted by Advocate Shri. Aloor that
the procedure contemplated under section 9 of the Indian
Evidence Act, has not been followed and the evidence of P.W.21,
22 and 23 is not trustworthy. However, as discussed above, these
witnesses are independent witnesses and their evidence coupled
with the evidence of Shri. D.M. Bansode, who has conducted
identification parade leave no doubt to state that all the formalities
were complied while conducting identification parade and the
witnesses had identified the accused persons. There seems no
substance in the contention raised by Advocate Shri. Aloor on
behalf of the accused.
Medical Evidence :
221] The post mortem report is the crucial document in this
case establishing the offence of rape and murder in gruesome
manner. The post mortem report states the cause of death of
90
Nayana Pujari as due to head injury. In this regard, Advocate Shri.
Aloor has given much stress upon his submission in the course of
his argument that as per prosecution story, Nayana Pujari died due
to strangulation by her Odhani. However, post mortem report
states that death is caused due to head injury. It is submitted by
Advocate Shri. Aloor that this fact is a strong circumstance in
favour of the accused and in view of this major inconsistency in
regard to the cause of death of Nayana Pujari, benefit of doubt has
to be given to the accused.
222] As against this, learned Special Public Prosecutor Shri.
Nimbalkar has submitted in his argument that the prosecution has
not come with a specific case that the death of Nayana Pujari is by
strangulation and the cause of death can be ascertained by the
medical evidence only. Special P.P. Shri. Nimbalkar has also
submitted that though the accused had strangulated the neck of
Nayana Pujari by her Odhani, it cannot be said that she died
immediately due to strangulation. As she was taken subsequently
to Jarewadi Fata and her head was smashed with a big stone, her
death is due to head injury, as has been stated by P.W.26
Dr.Dhongde in his evidence and as has been reflected from post
mortem report Exh.234.
223] Here, it has to be noted that in post mortem report, the
injuries mentioned were found to be ante mortem and ligature
mark was also found and in view of this, there is no scope to doubt
about the story put forth by prosecution about commission of
murder of Nayana Pujari by the accused and there seems no
substance in the argument advanced by Advocate Shri. Aloor on
behalf of the accused about cause of death.
224] Advocate Shri. Aloor for the accused has also

submitted in his argument that as per the evidence of P.W.26 Dr.
Dhongde, Rigor Mortis was not present. Rigor Mortis starts within
3 to 4 hours of death and spread over the entire body in 12 hours
and remains for next 12 hours and thereafter it subsides. Absence
of Rigor Mortis on the body of Nayana Pujari clearly establishes
that death must have been caused prior to 24 to 36 hours before
post mortem, and the prosecution has not proved the time of
death of Nayana Pujari and benefit of this fact goes to the accused.
225] Per contra, it is submitted by learned Spl. P.P. Shri.
Nimbalkar that the testimony of P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde coupled with
the testimony of D.W.1 Dr. Sorate clearly establish that the death
of victim is homicidal death resulted from the fatal head injuries
inflicted by the accused with three stones weighing about 7 and 5
Kgs. The fatal injury was so gruesome and caused with such
brutality that the brain matter of the victim was exposed. Post
mortem was started on 9102009 at 1.10 p.m. and completed at
2.15 p.m. P.W.26 has stated in his evidence that death was prior
to 24 to 30 hours.
226] Here, it has to be noted that P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde in his
crossexamination was suggested that the death has occurred prior
to 24 to 36 hours of post mortem. In context with the time of
death of Nayana Pujari, it is material to note that the approver
Rajesh Chaudhari left the spot and parted from the accused
persons after 11 p.m. Considering the time when approver left the
92
spot and considering the evidence of P.W.26 coupled with the

relevant circumstances brought on record, it can be gathered that
the incidence has occurred between midnight of 7102009 and
8.10.2009 and the medical evidence supports this fact. The
argument advanced on behalf of the accused by Advocate Shri.
Aloor in this regard thus finds no place.
As to C.A. Reports :
227] The C. A. Reports Exh.338 to 350 proved by

prosecution through the evidence of Investigating Officer Shri.
Deepak Sawant (P.W.37) support the prosecution case. The C.A.
Report Exh.338 clearly states that DNA of accused Yogesh Raut
match with semen stain cutting from back seat of the car and
semen stain cutting on cloth piece found at driver side door
cabinet.
228] The C.A. Report Exh.341 states that three stones Ex.1,
Ex.2 and Ex.3 had human blood and Ex.2 and Ex.3 is having blood
Group AB, which is the blood group of deceased Nayana Pujari.
The said report states that Ex.4 i.e. earth is having human blood.
Pyjama (Salwar) Ex.6, Kurta Ex.7, Odhani Ex.8, knicker Ex.9 and
brassiere Ex.10 were having human blood with AB blood group.
In the said report, hair (Exh.11) is shown to be human hair.
229] The C.A. report Exh.343, which is about clothes of the
accused persons namely Yogesh and Mahesh, states that full pant
Ex.1 was stained with blood of blood group 'AB'. Sandal Ex.12 of
deceased has also blood stains of blood group of 'AB'.
230] As per C.A. Report Exh.347, hair in polythene bag is
human hair and it is of deceased Nayana Pujari. As stated above,
as per the FSL Report Exh.338, the DNA profile obtained from
blood sample of accused Yogesh Raut. FSL MLC No. DNA 494/09
Ex.2 exactly match with the semen cuttings from the back seat of
the car and from cloth piece found at driver side door cabinet.
231] Thus, all the C.A. Reports relied upon by prosecution
are showing blood of blood group AB, which is the blood group of
deceased Nayana Pujari on the clothes of the accused persons and
this is sufficient to establish that they are the author of the crime
in question. When human blood is found on the clothes of the
accused, the accused have to explain as to how the clothes worn
by them contain human blood stains. In the instant case, the
accused have not done so and this appears to be a highly
incriminating circumstance against the accused.
False Defence :
232] In the instant case, the defence of the accused is that of
total denial and it is their specific contention that it is the approver
P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari and his friends Sagar Sonawane and
Sunil Chaudhari are involved in the commission of offences.
When the accused have come with a specific case stating
involvement of other persons in the commission of offences
burden shifts on them to prove their contentions. However, the
accused have not brought any evidence on record in support of
their contention. Moreover, the prosecution has established it's
case by cogent, corroborative and consistent evidence showing
direct involvement of the accused persons in the commission of the
94
offences.
233] Here, it has to be noted that the Court dealing with a
criminal trial is to perform the task of ascertaining the truth from
the material before it. It has to punish the guilty and protect the
innocent. Burden of proof is on prosecution and the prosecution
has to establish it's case beyond reasonable doubt. In the absence
of direct evidence, the circumstantial evidence can be the basis of
conviction, if the circumstances are of conclusive nature and rule
out all reasonable possibilities of accused being innocent. Thus,
the prosecution probabalizes the involvement of the accused, but
the accused takes a false plea. Such false plea can be taken as an
additional circumstance against the accused.
234] In the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Smt.

Suvarnnamma and another, 2014, ALL SCR 3683, the Hon'ble
Apex Court held that false plea taken by accused provides a vital
additional circumstance against him.
235] In the instant case, this authority relied upon by the
prosecution assists it and as the plea taken by the accused seem to
be a false plea, it can be vital additional circumstance against
them.
236] On appraisal of evidence in its entirety, it reveals that
the prosecution has firmly established the circumstances on which
the case of prosecution is based. Thus, proved circumstances are
leading to the irresistible and inescapable conclusion that it were
the accused persons only, who abducted Nayana Pujari by
adopting deceitful means under the guise of dropping her to
Hadapsar, then committed rape on her, misappropriated her

belongings, she was then strangulated by Odhani and then she
was hit on her head by means of big stones brutally, ultimately
resulting in her death. Nayana Pujari was killed by the accused
persons with requisite intention and knowledge of causing her
death making the act punishable under section 302 of the Indian
Penal Code. With this discussion, I answer Point No.7 in the
affirmative.
Point No. 1 :
237] Let us now examine whether the accused persons

committed these offences proved against them by acting in league
and concert, by agreeing to commit the offences by indulging in
criminal conspiracy.
236] Section 120A of Indian Penal Code defines criminal

conspiracy and it reads as under :
“120A. When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to
be done,
(1) an illegal act, or
(2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement
is designated a criminal conspiracy:
Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit
an offence shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless some act
besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such
agreement in pursuance thereof.
96
Explanation : It is immaterial whether the illegal act is the

ultimate object of such agreement or is merely incidental to that
object. The essence of a criminal conspiracy is the unlawful
combination and ordinarily the offence is complete, when the
combination is framed.”
237] Plain reading of section 120A reveals that to establish
charge of conspiracy most important ingredient is the agreement
between two or more persons to do an illegal act.
238] What constitute an offence of criminal conspiracy is

explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu
Vs. Nalini, 1999 Cri. L.J. 124, and it is held that :
“The unlawful agreement, which amounts to a

conspiracy need not be formal or express but may be inherent in
and inferred from the circumstances especially declarations, acts
and conduct of conspirators. The agreement need not be entered
into by all the parties to it, at the same time, it may be reached by
successive action evidencing their joining of conspiracy. It has
been said that a criminal conspiracy is a partnership in crime and
there is in each conspiracy a joint or mutual agency for the
prosecution of a common plan. Thus, if two or more persons enter
into a conspiracy any act done by any of them pursuant to the
agreement is in contemplation of law, the act of each of them and
they are jointly responsible therefor. ”
239] Thus, in order to prove the offence of criminal

conspiracy punishable under section 120B of Indian Penal Code,
the prosecution has to establish :
I] The accused persons were having object to be

accomplished viz. Abducting Nayana Pujari, then commiting
rape on her and subsequently misappropriating her
belongings and committing her murder.
II] A plan or scheme was framed by the accused persons
for accomplishing or achieving this object.
III] There was agreement or understanding between the
accused persons for accomplishment of the object by
executing the same in the manner decided by them.
240] The prosecution therefore has to establish that in

unlawful combination the accused persons had done unlawful act
by acting under tacit agreement of accomplishment of their joint
venture. The aspect of conspiracy being connected with the mind
of a person or mental thinking of a person, naturally there cannot
be direct evidence on this aspect.
241] In the case in hand, deep scrutiny of evidence available
on record, shows that for accomplishment/achievement of the
object the accused persons have meticulously prepared a plan and
by cooperating with each other and acting in combination, they
executed plan hatched by them by abducting Nayana Pujari, taking
her to a secluded place, committing rape on her, misappropriating
her belongings and murdering her. Offering lift to Nayana Pujari
under the pretext of dropping her to Hadapsar by accused persons
was the first step towards commission of offence of abduction and
other consequent offences. The act and conduct of the accused
persons point out their agreement for commission of crime.
98
242] As discussed in foregoing paragraphs, the evidence of
witnesses coupled with subsequent act and conduct of the accused
clearly goes to show that the offence in question is an outcome of
ill designed plan of accused persons. The accused Yogesh Raut
called his friend Rajesh Chaudhari on phone and asked him to
bring condoms. All accused persons committed rape on Naayan
Pujari in Indica car. Indica car bearing No. MH14 BA 2952 by
which Nayana Pujari was taken by offering lift was subjected to
chemical analysis, after it's seizure vide panchnama Exh.200 dated
16102009. The C.A Report Exh. 342 in this regard reveals that
semen stains of accused Yogesh Raut match with semen stain
cutting found from rear side seat of the car and cloth piece found
in the driver seat door cabinet of the car. Moreover, commission
of rape on Nayana Pujari by the accused persons is established by
suggestions given to the relevant witnesses themselves in their
crossexamination on behalf of the accused.
243] After commission of rape, the accused had obtained

ATM pin code number of Nayana Pujari by giving threats by knife
and had withdrawn amount from ATM. On seeing identity card
of Nayana Pujari and getting known that she is working in
Synechron Company, where Rajesh Chaudhari was working and
with apprehension of getting identified, the accused persons killed
her in brutal manner by taking the car to Jarewadi Fata. This
sequence of events clearly show that the accused persons did the
acts in pursuance to their agreement made for commission of
crime. The chain of circumstances by no stretch of imagination
show that the accused persons were independently pursuing the
same end. The acts and conduct of the accused persons show that
they had agreed to commit the offence jointly by conspiring with
each other and the circumstances brought on record do show that
they had come together in pursuance of the unlawful object and
they committed crime in partnership.
244] Thus, taking resume of the entire evidence on record,
the resultant position comes to this that the prosecution has been
successful to establish that the act of the accused persons comes
within the purview of section 120B of I.P.C.
245] To sum up, it can be said that the prosecution has

established that the accused persons had indulged in criminal
conspiracy and in pursuance to that criminal conspiracy for
achieving the desired goal on 7102009 at about 8.00 p.m., they
abducted Nayana Pujari, took her to secluded place i.e. Shankar
Parvati Mangal Karyalaya at Wagholi, committed rape on her and
subsequently murdered her. As such, the prosecution has
established the offence punishable under section 120B of the
Indian Penal Code. Consequently, I answer Point No.1 in
affirmative.
Points No. 2,5 and 9 :
247] So far as offence punishable under section 364 of

Indian Penal Code is concerned, it is not attracted in this case for
the reason that at the time when Nayana Pujari was abducted by
accused persons, there was no intention to commit her murder.
She was abducted initially with the motive of commission of rape
and robbery and it was subsequently developed motive to commit
100
murder with an apprehension that they should not be identified by
her.
248] Same is the case with offences punishable under

sections 394 and 201 of Indian Penal Code and the said offences
are not proved by prosecution. There is no evidence on record to
the effect that while committing robbery, the accused persons
voluntarily caused hurt to Nayana Pujari to attract section 394 of
I.P.C.
249] So far as offence punishable under section 201 of

Indian Penal Code is concerned, I am of the view that it is not
attracted in the present case and it cannot be applied to the
present accused persons. Section 201 of I.P.C. reads as under :
“201. Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or
giving false information to screen offender.Whoever,
knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has
been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of
that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening
the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention
gives any information respecting the offence which he
knows or believes to be false.”
250] To bring home an offence under section 201 of I.P.C.,
the ingredients to be established are :
1} Committal of an offence,
2} Person charged with the offence under section
201 of I.P.C. must have the knowledge or reason to
believe that an offence has been committed,
3} Person charged with the said offence should have
101 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
caused disappearance of evidence, and
4} The act should have been done with the intention of
screening the offender from legal punishment or with
that intention he should have given information
respecting the offence, which he knew or believe to be
false.
251] Unless the accused had the mens rea in the sense that
they knew the death of the deceased was not a natural one and
they knowingly become privy to the destruction of evidence,
conviction under section 201 of I.P.C. cannot be based.
252] Thus, in the light of this, on plain reading of section
201 of I.P.C., I am of the view that section 201 of I.P.C. is not
applicable to the present accused persons and the accused cannot
be held guilty so far as this offence is concerned. Learned Spl. P.P.
Shri Nimbalkar has also conceded that this offence cannot be
attributed to the present accused and it should be a third person,
who knows about commission of offence at the hands of accused
and who causes disappearance of evidence of offence. I therefore
answer Point No. 2,5 and 9 in the negative.
253] In context with my findings to Points No.1,3,4,6,7 and
8, before proceeding further I would prefer to keep in mind what
is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Allauddin Vs.
State of Bihar, 1990 Supreme Court Cases 490. In the said case,
the Hon'ble Apex Court held that :
“The requirement of hearing the accused is intended to

satisfy the rule of natural justice. It is a fundamental
102
requirement of fair play that the accused, who was hitherto
concentrating on the prosecution evidence on the question
of guilt should, on being found guilty, be asked, if he has
anything to say or any evidence to tender on the question of
sentence. This is all the more necessary since the courts are
generally required to make the choice from a wide range of
discretion in the matter of sentencing. To assist the Court
in determining the correct sentence to be imposed, the
legislature introduced subsection (2) to section 235. The
said provision therefore satisfies a dual purpose: it satisfies
the rule of natural justice by according to the accused an
opportunity of being heard on the question of sentence and
at the same time helps the Court to choose the sentence to
be awarded.”
254] Keeping this law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in mind, after informing the accused persons that they are found
guilty of charges under sections 120B, 366, 376(2)(g), 397, 302
and 404 of the Indian Penal Code against them, I defer here to
hear the parties on quantum of sentence. This case be posted on
952017 for hearing the parties.
( L.L. Yenkar)
Date: 852017. Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.
255] Heard accused No.1 Yogesh Raut. He has submitted

that he has no concern with the crime in question and police had
produced false evidence against him. It is also submitted by this
accused that it is Rajesh Chaudhari, who has committed all the
offences and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He is
having mother, wife and the daughter. He be shown leniency.
103 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
Heard accused No.2 Mahesh Thakur. He has also

submitted that he is innocent and false case is prepared against
him and he believe that he will get justice.
Heard Accused No.3 Vishwas Kadam. He has also

made same submission stating that he is innocent and he has not
committed any offence.
256] Heard learned Special Public Prosecutor Shri.

Nimbalkar on the quantum of sentence. He has submitted in his
argument that the balance between aggravating circumstances and
mitigating circumstances has to be seen and if the aggravating
circumstances out weigh the mitigating circumstances, then capital
punishment can be given. He has further submitted that even
today, except the accused No.1 other accused have not stated
about any mitigating circumstances. Accused No.2 and 3 have no
remorse even today.
257] Drawing attention of this Court to the case of Bachan
Singh and Macchi Singh, Special Public Prosecution Shri.
Nimbalkar has pointed out about guidelines to be followed by the
Court considering the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
258] It is also submitted by learned Spl. P.P. that the facts of
Dhananjoy Chatterjee alias Dhana Vs. State of W.B., 1995 AIR
SCW 510, and Purushottam Dashrath Borate and Anr. Vs.
State of Maharashtra, AIR 2015 Supreme Court 2170, are
identifical wherein death punishment was imposed by the Court.
Relying upon the Nirbhaya's case, it is submitted by Spl.P.P. Shri.
Nimbalkar that this latest judgment has to be followed in letter
104
and spirit. This case is totally in conformity with the case in hand.
259] It is further submitted by Shri. Nimbalkar that Nayana
Pujari was not only abducted, but her clothes were removed, they
were hidden below the front seat of Indica car and she was
paraded naked for hours together and he raised a question, “Can
there be more extremity than this ?”
260] Giving reference of other cases filed with list Exh.415
against the accused, it is submitted on behalf of the prosecution
that impact of this case on the community as a whole needs to be
considered. The accused persons had given painful death to
Nayana Pujari and they have not shown any remorse after
commission of offence and they deserve only capital punishment.
261] As against this, Shri. Aloor learned counsel for accused,
placing his reliance on the cases of Govindaswamy Vs. State of
Kerala, 2016 (4) KHC 773 (SC), Bachan Singh Vs. State of
Punjab, 1980 AIR (SC) 89 etc.(with list Exh.416), has tried to
show that there are various mitigating circumstances in favour of
the accused persons and those circumstances make them entitled
for lesser punishment. Advocate Shri. Aloor has also placed his
reliance on Nirbhaya's case and has submitted that in the said
case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has emphasized as to what are the
mitigating circumstances and the said authority assist the accused.
262] Advocate Shri. Aloor has further submitted that

recovery of the weapon of offence in this case is not at the instance
of accused and this is a mitigating circumstance in their favour.
The accused are in jail since last 8 years and they be given
105 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
opportunity of reformation. It is also submitted on behalf of the
accused that this case does not fall under the “rarest of rare case”
and minimum sentence be imposed.
263] So far as the offence punishable under section 302 of
the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the punishment provided is
death or imprisonment for life. Under section 354(3) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, life imprisonment is the rule and capital
sentence is exception to be resorted to for special reasons to be
stated. Wording of section 354(3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, reflects legislative command and the conditions to be
satisfied prior to awarding death sentence. While awarding such
sentence, the Court is required to weigh the mitigating
circumstances and aggravating circumstances keeping in mind the
probability of proportionate sentence. The mandate of section
354(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is that death sentence
cannot be awarded, unless the case falls under “rarest of the rare
case”, when alternative option is unquestionably foreclosed.
264] Now whether the case falls within rarest of the rare

case or not, has to be examined with reference to the facts and
circumstances of each case. On finding the case to be “rarest of
the rare case”, the Court is justified in awarding death penalty,
which is on the statute book.
265] The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Ediga

Anamma Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1974 Supreme
Court 799, has observed that :
“Deterrence through threat of death may still be a

106
promising strategy in some frightful areas of murderous

crime.”
It is further observed that:
“Horrendous features of the crime and hapless and

helpless state of the victim steal the heart of law for the
sterner scheme.”
266] What is rarest of the rare case is a concept difficult to
define and no straight jacket formula can be applied for
enumeration of “rarest of the rare case”. However, the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the matter of Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab,
1980, Supreme Court 898, has laid down the guidelines on this
aspect, which can be summarized as under :
A] The extreme penalty of death may be inflicted in

gravest cases of extreme culpability.
B] While imposing death sentence the circumstances of
the offender are also required to be taken into
consideration alongwith the circumstances of the crime.
C] Death sentence be imposed only when life

imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate
punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of
the crime; and
D] Extreme penalty can be imposed after striking the

balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances
found in the case.
267] Keeping in mind the observation of the Hon'ble Apex
107 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
Court in the case of Bachan Singh and Macchi Singh , let us now
see what are aggravating circumstances in this case.
Aggravating circumstances include :
a] If the murder has been committed after previous
planning and involves extreme brutality or
b] If the murder involves exceptional depravity.
Mitigating circumstances include :
a) That the offence was committed under the influence of
extreme mental or emotional disturbance,
b) The age of the accused, if the accused is a young or
old, he shall not be sentenced to death.
c) The probability that the accused would not commit
criminal acts of violence as would constitute a
continuing threat to society.
d) The probability that the accused can be reformed and
rehabilitated. The State shall by evidence prove that
the accused does not satisfy the conditions (c) and
(d) above.
e) That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the
accused believed that he was more justified in
committing the offence.
f) That the accused acted under the duress or domination
of another person, and
108
g) That the condition of the accused showed that he was
mentally defective and that the said defect impaired
his capacity to appreciate the criminality of his
conduct.
268] These guidelines were followed in Macchi Singh and

others Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1983 Supreme Court 957 by
holding that “death sentence would be imposed only in rarest of the
rare cases, when the collective conscience of the society is so shocked
that it would expect the holders of judicial power to inflict the death
penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards the
desirability or otherwise of retaining the death penalty as a
sentencing option.”
269] The following are the circumstances given by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Macchi Singh in which the case
can be treated as “rarest of the rare case” for imposing capital
punishment for entertaining such sentiment of the community or
society :
I} When the murder is committed in extremely brutal,

grotesque, diabolic, revolting or dastardly manner so as to
arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community.
II} When murder is committed for a motive which evinces
total depravity and meanness for example murder by hiring
assassin for money or resorting or cold blooded murder for
gains of a person visavis when the murderer is in a
dominating position or in a position of trust or murder is
committed in the course for betrayal of the mother land.
109 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
III} When the crime is enormous in proportion. For instance
when multiple murders say of all or almost all the family
members of a family and or large number of persons of a
particular caste, community or locality are committed.
IV} When the victim of a murder is an innocent child or a
helpless woman or old or infirmed person or a person visa
vis whom the murderer is in a dominating position or a
public figure generally loved and respected by the
community.
270] The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Devendra Pal

Singh Vs. State of NTC of Delhi, AIR 2002 Supreme Court 1661
and in the case of Atbir Vs. State of NTC of Delhi, AIR 2010
Supreme Court 3474, has held that :
Death sentence may be awarded when the murder is

committed in an extreme brutal manner or for a motive
which envisage total depravity and meanness. Further, it
has been held that death sentence can also be justified
when the crime is enormous in proportion or when the
victim of a murder is innocent child or helpless woman or
an old and infirmed person or person whom the murderer is
in dominating position.
271] Thus, the Court is required to follow the rule of

proportionality considering the circumstances of the case in
providing punishment according to the culpability of each kind of
criminal conduct keeping in mind the effect of inadequate
punishment on the society. Duty is cast upon the Court to respect
to the society's cry for justice against the criminals by imposing
punishment befitting the crime so that Courts reflect to be
110
abhorrence of the crime.
272] Now, let us examine, whether the case at hand falls

under the category of “rarest of the rare case”and if the answer is
in affirmative, what are the special reasons for awarding death
sentence.
273] As stated above, it is held by this Court that the

accused are found guilty of the offences punishable under sections
120B, 366, 376(2)(g), 397, 302 and 404 of the Indian Penal
Code. Let us therefore draw balance sheet of aggravating and
mitigating circumstances of the crime in question.
Aggravating circumstances :
i) Previous planning,
ii) Motive of crime,
iii) Manner of commission of crime,
iv) Betrayal of trust by accused,
v) Conduct of accused.
vi) Subsequent conduct of accused (disclosure to Rajesh

Chaudhari),
vii) Personality of the victim/deceased,
viii) Impact of the crime on community/society,
ix) Pendency of other cases of the similar nature against the
accused.
111 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
274] As against these aggravating circumstances, let us

consider what may be mitigating circumstances in favour of the
accused persons in order to strike the balance.
Mitigating circumstances in favour of the

accused :
I] Advocate Shri. Aloor has submitted in his argument that
nothing incriminating was found at the time of conduction
of post mortem examination by P.W.26 Dr. Dhongde and
the injuries found on the head of the deceased Nayana
Pujari caused her death. As per prosecution story, the death
of Nayana Pujari is by strangulation and as this
strangulation theory is not consistent with the cause of
death stated by P.W.26, this is a mitigating circumstance
in favour of the accused persons.
II] Recovery of weapon is not at the instance of the accused
and the recovery of articles and valuables of decesed
Nayana Pujari is doubtful.
III] No finger print report is obtained and the handwriting of
the accused has not been proved.
IV] No CDR which can be incriminating evidence against the
accused had been proved.
V] No incriminating article was found inside the Indica car.
VI] Semen stains found on Article P2 Indica car sent for

analysis are found to be of blood group 'B', which is the
blood group of approver.
112
275] Let us now examine whether aggravating

circumstances out weigh the mitigating circumstances making the
accused punishable with death.
Aggravating circumstances :
I} Previous Planning :
In the present case, on scrutiny of the evidence on

record along with the proved circumstances, it reveals that the
accused persons meticulously chalked out a plan to abduct Nayana
Pujari to commit rape on her and to commit robbery. After having
known that Nayana Pujari was working in the same company,
where the approver Rajesh Chaudhari was working, the accused
No.1 to 3 made a plan to kill her and they executed their plan with
extreme brutality. The commission of murder of Nayana Pujari
proved to be a preplanned murder.
II} Motive of Crime :
The proved circumstances on record go to show that
abduction of Nayana Pujari by the accused was to satisfy their
hunger for sex. It is made clear from the evidence on record that
the crime was not committed in a sudden impulse of sex, but ina
predetermined manner by acting in league. The act and conduct
of the accused Yogesh Raut calling Rajesh Chaudhari stating that “
iksjxh vk.kyh vkgs] xi xi djk;yk ;s” and asking him to bring
condoms clearly disclose the motive of the accused persons. As
stated above, the accused persons have committed rape on Nayan
Pujari, and after having succeeded in their motive of kidnapping
and raping, the accused having developed an apprehension as to
113 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
the possibility of their being identified by Nayana Pujari,

subsequently developed motive of murdering her. They
committed preplanned cold blooded murder of a helpless woman
woman Nayana Pujari in a most brutal manner with severe cruelty.
III} Manner of commission of crime :
The accused persons abducted Nayana Pujari by

deceitful means and committed rape on her one by one. The
accused Vishwas Kadam has committed rape twice. She was
stripped naked throughout. After ravishing her, they had
committed her murder in brutal way. The body of Nayana Pujari
was found in the gutter at Jarewadi Fata and this is a very very
unfortunate end of life of the said Nayana Pujari. The proved
circumstances establish that the accused persons firstly
strangulated the neck of Nayana Pujari by her Odhani and then
smashed her head by means of big heavy stones by taking her to a
secluded place at Jarewadi Fata. This definitely amounts to
brutality. Nayana Pujari was done to death in a very cruel manner
by accused persons. The injuries mentioned in post mortem report
indicate that the death of Nayana Pujari was very painful death.
IV} Betrayal of trust by accused :
Nayana Pujari being an employee of Synechron

company, was enjoying the facility of transpot provided by the
company for going to her work place from her residence and vice
versa. On the unfortunate day i.e. on 7102009, she was late and
she missed the company transport. The accused offered lift to her
on the guise of dropping her to Hadapsar and Nayana Pujari
114
reposing faith has accepted the lift. The accused persons betrayed
the faith of the said lady and had taken advantage of loneliness of
the helpless woman and committed crime in question.
V} Conduct of the accused :
In the present case, conduct of the accused persons,
since beginning appear to be inhuman. The accused have
addressed Nayana Pujari as a prostitute. Addressing an educated
married woman in such a way amounts to her great insult and
degradation. Accused persons after committing rape on Nayana
Pujari in Indica car turn by turn subsequently committed her
murder. Their conduct and behaviour during the entire journey
from the time of abduction of Nayana Pujari till committing her
murder appears to be inhuman.
The accused persons after ravishing Nayana Pujari,

brought food parcel from Dhaba. They had brought Bislery bottle
and they had enjoyed food in the car itself. They had also offered
food to Nayana Pujari, who was lying in naked condition. This
appears to be a strange and wild act on the part of the accused.
These acts and conduct of the accused cause me to state that they
are seasoned accused in commission of such type of offences.
VI] Subsequent conduct of the accused :
Post event conduct of the accused also show that even
after commission of crime in question in brutal manner, the
accused persons were not having any regret for what they had
done with Nayana Pujari. Accused No.1 after committing murder
of Nayana Pujari found his friend Rajesh Chaudhari and told that
115 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
he should not have any fear as they have killed Nayana Pujari.
This clearly shows that the accused persons have no respect about
law and they have no fear of law. They have killed Nayana Pujari
with an intention that their heinous act should not come to
surface.
It is significant to note here that on 1792011, he ran
away from Sassoon Hospital, when he was brought to the hospital
for treatment from Yerawada jail. Subsequently, a case bearing
Criminal Case No. 1072/2012 was filed under section 224, 225
and 419 etc. of the Indian Penal Code against him. The matter
was decided on 1652015 and as per order of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, F.C., Court No.3, Pune, he was convicted for the
offence punishable under sections 224, 419, 468 and 471 of the
Indian Penal Code. This conduct of accused Yogesh Raut
definitely is an aggravating circumstance against him.
VII] Personality of the victim/deceased :
Nayana Pujari was a married woman, aged 28 years,
married just before three years of incidence. She was raped by the
accused persons turn by turn. The accused persons have
committed the crime in question not under duress, nor on any
provocation and ended the life of the innocent, helpless,
defenceless young woman in a brutal manner. She was taken to
secluded place far away from her residence by the accused persons
and she would not have provided resistance to the accused. The
evidence on record in the present case speaks in volume. It
emerges from evidence that Nayana Pujari, a helpless and armless
116
woman, was weeping throughout and was requesting the accused
persons to let her go to her home. However, the accused persons
had not shown any mercy.
VIII] Pendency of other cases :
It is a matter of record that Sessions Case No. 72/2011
(Crime No.35/2010 of Mundhava police station) is pending
against the accused persons under sections 364, 376(2)(g), 302,
404 and 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
said incidence is pertaining to the lady by name Vishakha Abhijit
Mandal. The dead body of Vishakha Mandal in the said case was
not found. One more case was also pending against the accused
persons (Raijube's case), which was decided by the Court.
These facts make it crystal clear that the accused

persons are hardened criminals and they are habitual offenders
committing such type of heinous offences and they are destroying
the life of innocent women. As has been stated by approver Rajesh
Chaudhari in his evidence, the accused Yogesh Raut called him on
phone and said, “xi xi djk;yk tk;ps vkgs] iksjxh vk.kyh vkgs ”.
On asking by Rajesh Chaudhari as to what does mean by “ xi xi”?
Yogesh Raut said that when they have sexual intercourse with any
woman, they call it as “xi xi”, as code word. This shows the
nature and character of the accused persons establishing the fact
that they are habitual offenders.
IX] Impact of the crime on community/society :
The deceased Nayana Pujari was a young lady, aged 28
117 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
years, working in Synechron Company as a Software Engineer.

She was abducted by the accused persons by offering lift and was
raped by them one by one in the Indica car. After commission of
rape, the accused found that she was working in the same
company, where the approver Rajesh Chaudhari was working.
With an apprehension that they may be identified by Nayana
Pujari, they decided to kill her and committed her murder in
brutal manner. Her dead body was left near gutter at Jarewadi
Fata. This is a very unfortunate thing not only for deceased
Nayana Pujari and her relatives, but for the entire society at large.
276] The crime was committed by the accused persons in

extreme brutal manner showing their deprival character. Due to
crime of such gravity, intensity and magnitude committed by the
accused persons, safety of working women in the city of Pune,
came to jeopardy. The security of the society is endangered. Pune
city is a Hub of Information Technology Sector. Nowadays,
women are employees of I.T. Sector in large proportion and those
are considered to be backbone of any economy. Women of this
Era are participating in the process of economical development of
the country on equal footing with men. They are required to do
job in night shifts also. The families of such women assume that
they are safe, because the company will take care of them.
However, happening of such unfortunate incidence at the hands of
the persons, who are employees of the company itself has shocked
the conscience of the community at large. Such type of crimes
definitely create negative impact on the society and deter women
from seeking employment in lucrative sectors.
118
277] There seems no mitigating circumstances favouring the
accused persons in order to strike the balance. In the present
case, offences were not committed under the influence of extreme
mental or emotional disturbance. Considering the fact that
previously also, the accused persons have committed such
offences, there is no probability that they would not commit
criminal acts of violence as would constitute a continuous threat to
society. There is no probability that the accused persons can be
reformed or rehabilitated. They have not acted under duress or
domination of another person and they are not mentally defective.
278] Facts and circumstances of the matter and the evidence
on record reveal that they have committed murder of innocent
helpless woman, after meticulous planning with extreme brutality
and the murder involves exceptional depravity.
279] Considering the entire sequence of events from time of
abduction of Nayana Pujari till her death, it reveals that the
conduct and behaviour of the accused persons was so cruel and
gruesome that if the accused persons are allowed to live, they
would become menace to the society. The accused must be
punished adequately for their wild acts. The circumstances proved
demand for punishment of death for death.
280] The contention raised by accused persons regarding

quantum of sentence is totally irrelevant and those contentions
cannot tilt balance in their favour by suppressing aggravating
circumstances. The aggravating circumstances in this case out
weigh the mitigating circumstances and this case comes under
119 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
“rarest of the rare case” awarding death penalty to accused

persons. Considering the merciless manner of crime, considering
the inhuman conduct of the accused persons, considering the fact
that murder of Nayana Pujari was in cruel, brutal, diabolic and
gruesome manner, considering the fact that victim of a murder is
innocent, helpless and defenceless woman and considering the
impact of the crime on the community, I have no hesitation to hold
that this case comes within the purview of rarest of rare case.
281] Here, I have to mention that the investigation in this
case is fair investigation done on proper track. The Investigating
Officer Shri. Deepak Sawant and Shri. Ghanwat had taken sincere
efforts while investigating this crime and have done a creditable
job. The unique feature of this trial is that not a single witness
turned hostile. All the witnesses including the witnesses who are
the friends of accused persons were firm throughout and they have
assisted to bring the truth on record. This courageous attitude of
prosecution witnesses has also to be appreciated. Spl. P.P. Shri.
Nimbalkar did his level best and took sincere efforts to prove the
prosecution case.
282] Advocate Shri. Aloor, learned counsel for the accused
persons has also taken much pains to defend the accused persons.
283] Before parting with, I will have to mention that in the
case of Madan Gopal Kakkad Vs. Naval Dubey, (1992) 3 SCC
204, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that :
“Judges who bear the sword of justice should not
hesitate to use that sword with utmost severity to the
full and to the end if the gravity of the offences so
120
demand.”
With this, I pass the following order :
ORDER
Accused No. 1) Yogesh Ashok Raut, 2) Mahesh

Balasaheb Thakur and 3) Vishwas Hindurao Kadam are convicted
of the offence punishable under section 120B of the Indian Penal
Code and they are sentenced to death and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/ each. In default of payment of fine, the accused to
suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The accused be hanged
by neck till they are dead.

of the offence punishable under section 302 read with section
120B of the Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to death
and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/ each. In default of payment of fine,
the accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The
accused be hanged by neck till they are dead.

of the offence punishable under section 376(2)(g) read with
section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to
imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ each. In
default of payment of fine, the accused to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for one year.

121 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
Balasaheb Thakur and 3) Vishwas Hindurao Kadam are also

convicted of the offence punishable under section 404 read with
suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of
suffer R.I. for six months.

of the offence punishable under section 397 of the Indian Penal
Code and they are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
seven years.

Code and they are sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for
seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ each. In default of
payment of fine, the accused to suffer R.I. for six months.
All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

Balasaheb Thakur and 3) Vishwas Hindurao Kadam are acquitted
for the offences punishable under sections 201, 364 and 394 of the
Indian Penal Code.
The accused are entitled to set off as per the provisions
of section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sentence of death shall not be executed until it is

confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court.
122
The proceeding be sent to the Hon'ble High Court.
The approver Rajesh Pandurang Chaudhari be released
forthwith as he has complied with all the conditions of tender of
pardon.
The muddemal property mentioned in muddemal list
at Sr. No.1,3, 8 and 23 (watch of Titan company) be auctioned,
after the appeal period is over and sale proceeds be credited to the
Government.
Cash amount mentioned in muddemal list at Sr. No.4,
5, 6 and 23 be credited to the Government, after appeal period is
over.
Muddemal property at Sr. No.9 i.e. gold bangle be sent
to the Mint, if not claimed by the concerned, within a period of
three months from the date of this order.
Muddemal property at Sr. No.27 i.e. knife be sent to
the District Magistrate for disposal according to law, after the
appeal period is over.
Worthless muddemal property be destroyed, after the
Copy of the Judgment be provided to the accused free
of costs immediately.
Judgment pronounced in Open Court.
( L.L. Yenkar )
Date : 9/5/2017. Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.
*****
123 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
State Vs. Yogesh Ashok Raut etc. 3.
OPERATIVE ORDER

of the offence punishable under section 120B of the Indian Penal
Code and they are sentenced to death and to pay fine of
suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The accused be hanged
by neck till they are dead.

of the offence punishable under section 302 read with section
120B of the Indian Penal Code and they are sentenced to death
and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/ each. In default of payment of fine,
the accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The
accused be hanged by neck till they are dead.

of the offence punishable under section 376(2)(g) read with
imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ each. In
default of payment of fine, the accused to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for one year.

Balasaheb Thakur and 3) Vishwas Hindurao Kadam are also
124
convicted of the offence punishable under section 404 read with
suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of
suffer R.I. for six months.

Code and they are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
seven years.

Code and they are sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for
seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ each. In default of
payment of fine, the accused to suffer R.I. for six months.
All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

Balasaheb Thakur and 3) Vishwas Hindurao Kadam are acquitted
for the offences punishable under sections 201, 364 and 394 of the
Indian Penal Code.
The accused are entitled to set off as per the provisions
of section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sentence of death shall not be executed until it is

confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court.
The proceeding be sent to the Hon'ble High Court.
125 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
The approver Rajesh Pandurang Chaudhari be released
forthwith as he has complied with all the conditions of tender of
pardon.
The muddemal property mentioned in muddemal list
at Sr. No.1,3, 8 and 23 (watch of Titan company) be auctioned,
after the appeal period is over and sale proceeds be credited to the
Government.
Cash amount mentioned in muddemal list at Sr. No.4,
5, 6 and 23 be credited to the Government, after appeal period is
over.
Muddemal property at Sr. No.9 i.e. gold bangle be sent
to the Mint, if not claimed by the concerned, within a period of
three months from the date of this order.
Muddemal property at Sr. No.27 i.e. knife be sent to
the District Magistrate for disposal according to law, after the
Worthless muddemal property be destroyed, after the
Copy of the Judgment be provided to the accused free
of costs immediately.
Judgment pronounced in Open Court.
( L.L. Yenkar )
Date : 9/5/2017. Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.
*****
126
127 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
I affirm that the contents of this PDF file Judgment are same
word to word as per original Judgment.
Name of Steno : Mr. S.R. Shahane,
Court Name : Smt. L.L. Yenkar,
Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.
Date on which the P.O.
signed the judgment : 9/5/2017.
Date of PDF file : 9/5/2017.
Judgment uploaded on : 9/5/2017.
128
129 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.
130

Nayana Pujari Case Judgement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nayana Pujari Case Judgement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 S.C. No. 106/10 – Judgment.

2] Facts of the prosecution case in brief, can be

5] On 8­10­2009 at about 16.05 hours at Khed police

7] As missing complaint bearing No. 320/09 was

9] The Investigating Officer Shri. Deepak Sawant

10] On completion of investigation, the Investigating

13] The accused persons have submitted their written

5} A.P.I. Rohidas Harishchandra Chikate as P.W.5 vide

23] Santosh Babaji Kothavale as P.W.23 vide Exh.214 from

26] Dr. Prakash Vishwanath Dhongde as P.W.26 vide Exh.

30] Aslam Akbar Shaikh as P.W.30 vide Exh.262, who has

31] Police Inspector, Caste Verification Committee namely

32] Police Naik Mayur Madan Suryavanshi as P.W.32 vide

16] The accused in this case in support of their defence

12} Vishwajeet Madhukar Patil as P.W.12 vide Exh.393

17] I have heard Shri. Harshad Nimbalkar, the learned

19] On perusal of evidence on record and upon hearing

Sr. POINTS FINDINGS

14 BA 2952 at the open ground near

6] Does prosecution prove that accused In affirmative.

7] Does prosecution prove that accused In affirmative.

conspiracy hatched between them did

9] Does prosecution prove that accused In negative.

10] What order ? As per final

22] The prosecution has examined the approver Rajesh

23] P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari in his evidence has stated

the car on the front seat by the side of the driver. They were

36] From this evidence of P.W.17 Rajesh Chaudhari, it

37] In this regard, Advocate Shri. Aloor for the accused,

40] In view of the order below Exh.13, which was

41] The evidence of approver in this case is directly

43] The object of section 306 of the Code of Criminal

45] In the case of Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary and

46] In the case of Piara Singh Vs. The State of Punjab,

50] In regard to the incidence of commission of rape on

51] P.W.7 Pramod Rohidas Agarwal, who is an

52] This witness has further stated that the accused

cupboard. Mahesh Thakur opened iron cupboard. He took out

60] Police requested 4 to 5 persons to go into the river.

62] It is specifically stated by this witness that papers

Exh.129. This witness has identified black coloured carry bag

63] P.W.8 Chandansingh Thakur deposed that he is

66] On 11­11­2009, again he (Chandansingh Thakur)

greenish pant Article 26 and knife Article 27. He has also

76] Here, it has to be noted that the seized vehicle i.e.

Hero Honda vehicle is in the same condition as it was. This

78] This witness has further stated that he was knowing

returned the note to the said boy. On that count, some

84] On appraisal of evidence of the above referred

86] In the instant case, the evidence about extra judicial

88] In the case of Baskaran and another Vs. State of

89] In the case of State of U.P. Vs. M.K. Anthony, AIR

91] In regard to the offence of rape, the evidence of

ii) Ligature mark on anterior aspect of neck extending on both

92] On internal examination, he found the following

i) CLW over frontal part of head on right side extending to

94] In this regard, Shri. Aloor, learned counsel for the

body of deceased. Considering this evidence, the argument

99] This witness has also proved preparation of

100] As per prosecution story, the body was found at

105] By examining Chandansingh Thakur as P.W.8 vide

106] The memorandum (Exh.133) of accused Vishwas

107] The memorandum of the approver Rajesh Chaudhari

109] In the evidence of P.W.36 P.I. Shri. Ghanwat, it is

5] On 8102009 at about 16.05 hours at Khed police

66] On 11112009, again he (Chandansingh Thakur)

116] On 28102009, the approver Rajesh Chaudhari

118] On 12122009, accused Vishwas Kadam has given

143] It is brought on record in his crossexamination that

150] P.W.21 Sachin Bhondve was suggested in his cross

153] P.W.27 Chimaji Madhe in his crossexamination has

156] In the crossexamination of P.W.37 Police Inspector

161] Moreover, considering the crossexamination of the

183] On 9102009, he (Rajesh) read a news in daily

201] This crossexamination of the witnesses on behalf of