Aman Prakatsingh Jat vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 25 June, 2026

July 11, 2026

Bombay High Court

Aman Prakatsingh Jat vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 25 June, 2026

1. Five accused persons were charged by the Special Judge,
Nashik in Special (MCOC) Case No.2 of 2013 under Section 3 (1) (i)
of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short,
“MCOCA”), as it was alleged that they were the members of
organised crime syndicate under the leadership of accused no.1
Chetan Yashwantrao Pagare, who indulged in organised crime with
an objective of gaining pecuniary benefits using violence, coercion,
threats and intimidation and for committing wrongful confinement of
one Vipin Bafna for more than 3 days and thereby they committed an
offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (ii) of MCOC Act. They also
faced a charge under Section 3 (2) of the MCOC Act, as it was
alleged that being the members of the organized crime syndicate they
conspired to commit kidnapping for ransom and murder of Vipin
Bafna under the gang leadership of accused no.1 and they were also
charged under Section 3 (4) of the MCOCA.

SPONSORED

All the five accused persons also faced charge under Section
120-B of IPC, as it was alleged that on 08/06/2013 all of them, as
members of organised crime syndicate conspired with each other to
commit an illegal act, namely, to kidnap for ransom and commit
murder of Vipin Bafna and committed kidnapping for ransom and

Ashish
3/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

murdered him in pursuance of the said conspiracy and therefore, they
committed an offence punishable under Section 120-B of IPC. Since
the accused persons kidnapped Vipin Bafna for ransom and put him
to death, on failure of his father Gulabchand Bafna to pay ransom,
they were also charged for committing an offence punishable under
Section 364-A read with 34 of IPC.

In furtherance of common intention, since the accused
knowingly caused death of Vipin Bafna, they also faced charge under
Section 302 read with section 34 of IPC, and since they caused
certain evidence connected with the offence to disappear with
intention to screen themselves from legal punishment, they were also
charged for committing an offence punishable under Section 201 read
with section 34 of IPC. In addition, the charge against them also
invoked Sections 343, 506 read with 34 of IPC, and they also faced
accusations under the Arms Act, as they were found to be in
possession of deadly weapon without any licence and the charge was
also framed under Section 37(1) punishable under Section 135 of the
Bombay Police Act.

2. All the accused persons pleaded innocence and they chose to
be tried and they faced the trial before the Special MCOCA Court in
form of Case No.2 of 2013.

In support of its case, the prosecution lead evidence of 37
witnesses and the evidence brought on record by the prosecution was
put to the accused persons when their statements were recorded under
Section 313 of Cr.P.C.





Ashish
                               4/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

On appreciation of the evidence, the Special Court acquitted
the three accused namely Akshay @ Valya Suraj Sule, accused no.3,
Sanjay Randhir Pawar, accused no.4, and Pammi Bhagwan
Chaudhari, accused no.5 of all the charges. The two accused, Chetan
Yashwantrao Pagare and Aman Prakatsingh Jat were acquitted of the
charges under the MCOCA, but they were convicted of the charges
framed against them under Section 302, 201, 364-A, 120-B, 343 and
506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC‘)

The Special Judge relying upon the evidence laid before him
and on recording a finding of guilt for the aforesaid charges, which
were proved by the prosecution, extensively heard the prosecution as
well as the Advocate for the accused no.1 and 2 on the point of
imposition of sentence. Applying the principle laid down in several
authoritative pronouncement, to fit the crime into the category of ‘the
rarest of the rare case’, the fact that the victim was an innocent
youngster, who had been done away to death for no fault of his own,
and only for the sake of money and as he was killed in a brutal
manner and his body was thrown in an isolated place, the learned
Special Judge concluded that the offence committed by the accused
was most heinous in the eyes of law. He also concluded that the
victim was treated as a commodity and also inferred that the conduct
of the accused explicitly showed that they are a menace to the society
and looking into their antecedents and behavioral pattern, it was
impossible that they would be reformed or rehabilitated.

By relying upon the principle of law laid down in Bachan
Singh vs. State of Punjab1, as well as the decision in case of

1 1980 2 SCC 684

Ashish
5/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Shankar Kisanrao Khade vs. State of Maharashtra 2, the learned
Judge considered the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and
by setting them apart, and by striking a balance between the two, an
inference was drawn that there were approximately nine aggravating
circumstances as juxtaposed against two of the mitigating
circumstances that were collated. Giving full weightage to the
mitigating circumstances, the balance-sheet of aggravating
circumstances and mitigating circumstances was held to tilt in favour
of the aggravating circumstances and the accused being of young age,
was itself not sufficient to consider it to be a mitigating circumstance.
It was concluded that the aggravating circumstances are outweighing
the mitigating circumstances, and taking into consideration all the
relevant factors i.e. crime, criminal balance-sheet of mitigating and
aggravating circumstances, the conclusion was drawn that the offence
committed by the accused fell into the category of ‘rarest of rare’.

Since the Trial Judge expressed that there was no ground to
show the leniency or mercy in case of such heinous crime, accused
no.1 Chetan Yashwantrao Pagare and accused no.2 Aman Prakatsingh
Jat, on their guilt being proved were directed to be hanged by neck
till they are dead on being convicted for committing an offence
punishable under Section 302, 364-A, read with 34 and 120-B of IPC.

In view of Section 28 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
the sentence of death was subjected to confirmation by the High
Court and that is how the Confirmation Case No.1 of 2023 is placed
before us.




2 (2013) 5 SCC 546

Ashish
                                6/71       Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the two accused,
namely, Aman Prakatsingh Jat has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 116
of 2023, and accused Chetan Yashwantrao Pagare has preferred
Criminal Appeal No. 108 of 2023.

The Criminal Appeals filed by the accused came to be admitted
by order dated 29/01/2024. Upon the Record and Proceedings with
the paper book being received in Confirmation Case No.1 of 2023,
the three Appeals are taken up for hearing.

3. The State of Maharashtra in Confirmation Case No.1 of 2023 is
represented by Ms. Dabholkar, the learned APP, who also represent
the State in Appeal No. 116 of 2023 and Appeal No. 108 of 2023,
Advocate Nitin Satpute represented the Appellant Chetan Pagare in
Appeal No. 108 of 2023, wherein the learned Counsel Mr. S. T.
Pandey represented the Appellant Aman Prakash Jat in Criminal
Appeal No. 116 of 2023.

With their able assistance, we have perused the paper book,
which comprise of the deposition of the witnesses as well as the
documentary evidence brought on record which was appreciated by
the Additional Sessions Judge, before delivering his judgment on
16/12/2022 which has given rise to the confirmation Appeal filed by
the State and two Appeals by the convicts on death row.

4. Before we appreciate the submissions in the Appeals, it is
necessary that we would briefly refer to the case of the prosecution as
laid before the Trial Judge.

On 10/06/2013, PW-9 Gulabchand lodged an FIR alleging that
his son Vipin, resident of Ozar, commuted daily to Nashik for

Ashish
7/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

attending two classes, scheduled at 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. and 8:30 to
10:00 p.m. On 8/06/2013, Vipin was dropped to Nashik by his uncle
at 5:00 p.m. by car, but he did not return home. However, between
11:00 to 11:15 p.m., on being contacted on his mobile, he informed
that he was late from the class and had preferred to stay overnight
with a friend named Deshmukh and his phone was disconnected.

On 9/06/2013 PW-9 and his brother Sunil inquired from the
class of Vipin, to receive information that he did not attend the class
the previous day and therefore they lodged a missing complaint at
Panchavati Police Station, which was registered as CR No. 212 of
2013 under Section 364 of IPC. On the very same day, at about 11:00
a.m., Gulabchand PW-9 got call from Vipin’s mobile number from an
unknown person, who threatened that he must keep Rs. 1 Crore ready
and must not tell anyone about the demand otherwise, they would
cause harm to his son. He, therefore, approached the Panchavati
Police Station and gave his statement to the police.

On 13/06/2013, PW-9 received another call from some
unknown number demanding money and he responded by stating that
he is ready to pay but he must be allowed to speak to his son but the
phone was disconnected. This was also informed by him to the police
on the very same date.

On 14/06/2013, at 4:00 p.m., he gained knowledge about the
murder of his son, and on a call being received from the police, he
approached the spot of the incident in Aadgaon Shivar on Vinchur-
Dalvi road, when he saw the dead body of his son and he identified
by him.



Ashish
                               8/71       Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

5. The investigating machinery being set in motion on the
occurrence of the aforesaid events, the investigation was conducted
and since the Investigating Officer attributed the act to an organized
crime syndicate, Sanction under Section 23 of the Maharashtra
Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 was obtained and the case was
made over to the Special Court. The accused were charge-sheeted on
completion of investigation and charge was framed.

6. The version of PW-9 received corroboration from his brother
Sunil Suhalal Bafna, examined as PW-14. He deposed before the
Court that he dropped Vipin at Panchavati Karnja near Meghraj
Bakery at around 5:00 – 5:30 p.m., on 8/06/2013 and thereafter, he
picked up his daughter and went back to Ozar. On 9/06/2013, he
received phone call from PW-9, informing about the threatening call
received by him and therefore, they lodged a missing complaint.

PW-14 speak in sync with PW-9, when he deposed that from
9/06/2013 to 13/06/2013 they were searching for Vipin, and another
call was received by his brother on 13/06/2013 demanding money. A
further call was received about the dead body lying at Adgaon Shivar
and on reaching the field, the dead person was identified to be Vipin.
According to PW-14, he had sustained injuries on his body from
which blood was oozing. The statement of Sunil was recorded on
10/06/2013, and his supplementary statement was recorded on
20/06/2013. He also identified the clothes worn by the Vipin on the
day when he dropped him at Panchavati.

7. One Sanjay Suhalal Bafna, PW-20, the brother of the first
informant, who runs a grocery shop in the name of Bafna Brothers
also confirm the version of the informant that Vipin used to attend

Ashish
9/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

tuition classes at Ashok Stambha between 6:00 to 8:30 p.m., and
attended dance classes from 8:00 to 10:30 p.m., He received a phone
call from his brother Gulabchand on 9/06/2013 informing that Vipin
had not returned home and his mobile is switched off. According to
him, father of Vipin took a search and when he could not be found,
missing complaint was lodged with Panchavati Police Station. He
corroborated the version of the informant by stating that his brother
received a phone call from unknown person demanding a ransom of
Rs. 1 Crore and threatening that if the demand is not satisfied, the
consequence would be disastrous.

8. As per the case of the prosecution, on 14/06/2013 it was
revealed to the family members that Vipin was found to be murdered
when they received a call from the police, they went to the Adgaon
Shivar on Vinchur-Dalvi road, to find his body outside a small house,
which was identified by PW-9 and he also identified the articles
belonging to him.

9. Narendra Pingle, the Investigating Officer attached to the
Panchavati Police Station as Senior PI Crime received the
information about one dead body lying at Adgaon in the agricultural
field of one Mr. Salunkhe. In the presence of the relatives of the
deceased, who identified the body and in presence of the panchas the
inquest panchanama was conducted. Spot panchanama was prepared
and the articles from the spot were seized. A rough sketch of the spot
was drawn and further directions were issued to the Police Naik by
the Investigating Officer to issue letter to the Civil Hospital to collect
blood and nail samples of the deceased. The investigating machinery
was thus set into motion to trace the accused, who had caused the

Ashish
10/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

death of Vipin, son of PW-9.

10. During the course of investigation, several witnesses came
forward, who provided clue to the Investigating Officer and after
recording their statements and collecting the relevant evidence in
form of the telephone calls as PW-9 had received call for ransom,
five accused persons were nabbed and charge was framed against
them, and they were put on trial. However, the trial Judge, acquitted
three accused and only convicted accused no.1 Chetan Pagare and
accused no.2 Aman Jat for committing offence punishable under
Section 364-A, 302, 201, 120-B, 343, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

11. The guilt of the accused persons was attempted to be proved by
the prosecution, by resting its case on circumstantial evidence as
there was no direct evidence available.

The chain commenced with the father of Vipin lodging a
missing report, when his son who accompanied his brother Sunil
Bafna (PW-14) on 8/06/2013, and was dropped at Panchavati Karanja
in the regular routine for attending his classes, but did not return
home. When attempt was made to contact him, his phone was
switched off, but when contact was established between 11:00 to
11:15 p.m., he could speak to his son who told him that since he was
delayed, he is halting at the place of his friend and his phone was
disconnected. On 9/06/2013, the first informant along with his
brother made inquiries with the coaching class of Vipin to gain
information that he did not attend the class on the previous day and
this prompted them to file a missing report on 9/06/2013.

Gulabchand received a phone call from Vipin’s number and

Ashish
11/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

one unknown person demanded a sum of Rs. 1 Crore and failure to
do so, he was threatened of dire consequences. This resulted in he
approaching the police on 10/06/2013 and lodging of a report. On
13/06/2013, he received another phone call from an unknown number
when he expressed his willingness to make the payment as sought
for but requested the caller to talk to his son, but this request was
denied and the phone was disconnected. It is on 14/06/2013, when
one dead body was found, it was identified by Gulabchand to be of
his son.

12. In the chain of circumstances, falls one Hemant Deokar, a
rickshaw driver, who was waiting for the customers at the rickshaw
stand near Shitladevi temple on 9/06/2013, at around 9:00 to 9:15
a.m., and he was approached by Chetan Pagare accused no.1, Sanjay
Pawar, accused no.4., Akshay Sule, accused no. 3, who were
accompanied by one slim person. Aman Jat, who was behind the
temple was called by Hemant from his mobile phone who responded
by saying that he would come in two minutes and arrived at the spot a
few minutes afterwards.

Hemant was told that some beddings were to be carried to the
flat and thereafter accused no.1 and 2 along with the slim person sat
in his rickshaw and they went to the flat of Aman Jat in the area of
Kevdiban, River View Apartment. Two beddings were brought from
the flat by Aman and put in the rickshaw and once again the trio sat
in his rickshaw and asked him to take them to Dathrak Phata, Nishant
garden, Nav Akash Apartment, Building No.12. Aman told the person
in the rickshaw to take the bedding up, by calling him by his name
‘Vipin’ and thereafter Chetan and Vipin took the beddings to the flat.


Ashish
                                12/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Aman told to Hemant that his fare will be paid tomorrow.

Hemant Deokar, therefore, was cited as a key witness by the
prosecution and examined as PW-18.

In the dock, he identified accused no.1 Chetan Pagare as well
as Aman Jat and other accused persons. The slim person, who
accompanied Aman and Chetan in the rickshaw was also identified
by him when his photograph was shown to him (Articles 27 and 32).
Before the Court he deposed that the person in the photograph was
the slim person, who was in company of Chetan Pagare, Sanjay
Pawar and Aman Jat on the said date.

PW-18 deposed before the Court that he was suffering from
piles and diabetes, and he was admitted in Niramay Hospital from
9/06/2013 to 14/06/2013 and on 17/06/2013, he came across the
news in the newspaper about Chetan Pagare, Sanjay Pawar, Akshay
Sule kidnapping one person and demanding ransom of Rs. 1 Crore
and he saw the photograph of Vipin in the newspaper, and he
recollected that he had dropped the said person along with other four
persons at Dhatrak Phata, Nishant Garden. He also recollected that
the two persons, who were accompanying the person whose
photograph had appeared in the newspaper were Chetan Pagare and
Aman Jat. He therefore, called the police station from the Hospital
and the police recorded his statement while he was admitted. His
statement was also recorded by the Magistrate.

13. Another witness on whose version the prosecution has relied to
establish the chain of circumstances is one Mayur Rajaram Kurhade,
PW-17, who received a phone call from Chetan Pagare from the

Ashish
13/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

mobile of Aman Jat on 12/06/2013. The phone call was received
from mobile number 9511271313, and Chetan Pagare, who spoke to
him from the mobile asked him to take his motorcycle Hero Honda
from his house and bring it to the flat of Aman Jat near Panchavati
college.

He abided by the directions and picked the vehicle from the
house of Chetan Pagare. When he was at Jakat Naka, he received a
phone call from Chetan Pagare and he asked him to come near
M.E.T. college behind Girls Hostel. He went there on the vehicle and
he was lead to a flat behind M.E.T. College Girls Hostel and found
Chetan Pagare wearing banian and pant and sleeping on the cot with
face downwards, whereas Aman was found sitting. Mayur was also
asked to sit and he was there for 15-20 minutes chit-chatting.

He saw Vipin Bafna coming from the bedroom to the hall and
kitchen arch on his knees with his hands tied behind, and his legs
were crossed and tied with black lace and his mouth covered with
white strip of cloth.

Looking at this scenario, he was frightened and he immediately
expressed his desire to leave. While leaving, he was threatened that
he shall not divulge what he saw to anyone, otherwise he would be
done to death and he assured them that he will not disclose the
incident.

14. Mayur Kurhade, being examined as PW-17, deposed about the
happenings of 12/06/2013, and informed the Court that he did not
speak about the incident to anyone as Chetan Pagare was a hardened
criminal and was externed by the police and the incident was only

Ashish
14/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

narrated to him by the police when his statement was recorded on
16/06/2013. His statement was also recorded by the Magistrate on
19/06/2013.

He was confronted with a CD, in which Mayur (PW17) is seen
sitting and Vipin Bafna crawling on his knees with his hands and legs
tied. There was also a sound of laughter and he identified it to be of
Aman Jat.

Mayur is a witness who saw Vipin in confinement by the
accused persons, and he specifically named Aman Jat and Chetan
Pagare, who were present in the Flat, where he was asked to reach the
motorbike of Chetan Pagare on 12/06/2013.

He identified Chetan Pagare and Aman Jat in the dock.

15. The body of Vipin, who went missing from the evening of
8/06/2013 was found in a field in Aadgaon Shivar, belonging to
Rajendra Salunkhe, examined as PW-13. The agricultural land was
uncultivated and there was a shed which was not in use but in a
dilapidated condition with its doors and windows broken and this is
reflected in the spot panchnama, which is proved through PW-2
Nemichand Madanlal Modi, who acted as a panch on the spot
panchanama and the seizure panchnama.

From the spot, there is recovery of one goggle with grey
glasses and a pair of brown colour sports shoes with ‘8’ number,
which was identified by Gulabchand as belonging to his son Vipin.
From the spot, the samples of blood stained mud was also collected
along with the gunny bag which was found at the spot. A wooden log
(Article 5) was also recovered from the spot in addition to two pieces

Ashish
15/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

of towel (cloth strip), which was also identified by the panch witness,
Nemichand Modi (PW2).

16. The inquest panchanama is at (Exhibit – 77) and Gangaram
Murlidhar Shelar, one of the pancha to the inquest panchnama is
examined by the prosecution as PW-1. The panchanama refer to the
injuries on the body, which was identified to be of Vipin by his father
and uncle.

The inquest panchanama record the injuries on the body of the
deceased on left and right hands, back and below the waist.

The body was thereafter sent for autopsy and the postmortem
notes (Exhibit-162) is brought on record by the prosecution through
Dr. Anand Vilas Pawar (PW-11). The postmortem notes were
prepared by Dr. S.P. Datir, but since he was transferred to Nagpur,
Dr. Pawar deposed on the basis of the postmortem notes prepared by
him as the report was under the signature of Dr. Datir.

The postmortem, being conducted on 14/06/2013 from 17:15
p.m. to 08.25 p.m., and in Column no.17 of the report, there is a
mention of 26 wounds, which include incised wounds as well as stab
wounds and multiple abrasions. The postmortem notes, recorded the
injuries in column 17, and in column 20, it record existence of
fracture of 7, 8 and 9 ribs on the right side and the right and left lung
collapse with rupture.

The cause of death as per the report was on account of
‘hemorrhagic shock due to multiple stab injuries and multiple rupture
of organs’.




Ashish
                                 16/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

When Dr. Pawar was recalled, in the wake of the order passed
by the Court, he admitted that postmortem notes were prepared by
Dr. S.P. Datir, but he categorically stated that he has also performed
autopsies. The Doctor is subjected to extensive cross-examination,
but he remained consistent in his version that the injuries sustained
was sufficient to cause death of the deceased.

From the postmortem report and the deposition of the Doctor
who offered an explanation to the postmortem notes, though not the
Medical Officer who conducted the autopsy, it is evidently clear that
the deceased Vipin died due to hemorrhagic shock due to multiple
stab injuries and multiple rupture of organs.

17. Upon conducting the investigation to the aforesaid extent, the
Senior P.I. attached to Panchavati Police Station, Narendra Pingle
analyzed the CDR and SDR in order to nail the assailants of Vipin,
who initially went missing resulting into registration of CR No. 212
of 2013, by invoking the offence punishable under Section 364-A of
IPC, but upon the body of Vipin being discovered, he sent a report to
the JMFC informing that Section 302 and 201 are added.

On the basis of the investigation carried out and the analysis of
CDR and SDR, on 15/06/2013, Aman Jat was called to the police
station and it was found that he was shown as an accused on record at
Panchavati Police Station. From the information supplied by Aman
Jat, Chetan Pagare accused no.1 was also brought to the police
station, to reveal that there was an injury sustained by him on his
three left hand fingers. Thereafter, the other accused persons were
brought to the police station and they were forwarded for medical
examination. Through the investigating officer, the arrest

Ashish
17/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

panchanama are exhibited to reveal that Chetan Pagare and Aman Jat
were arrested on 15/06/2013.

Dr. Nareshkumar Shivajirao Bagul (PW-12) examined Chetan
Pagare, who was referred to the Casualty Department of the Civil
Hospital and he was brought to Panchavati Police Station. He was
examined on 15/06/2013, and PW-12 issued medical certificate
(Exhibit-164) in regards the injuries sustained by Chetan Pagare and
the certificate mention of two horizontal incised wounds at the index
finger and the little finger and one horizontal wound on the left
middle finger at the tip.

PW-12, who examined Chetan deposed that the injuries were
caused by sharp weapon and the age of injuries was more than 24
hours.

18. The Prosecution also relied on the discovery at the instance of
the accused effected through Discovery Panchanama. Upon the arrest
of the accused Nos.1 and 2, on 15/06/2013, while in police custody
accused Aman Jat expressed his willingness to produce the memory
card, in which the video clip of the deceased was recorded by him
along with the sword-stick and the knife as well as the motorcycle
which was used in commission of crime.

The memorandum statement was recorded in presence of two
panch witnesses, Manoj Patani, being one of them, being examined
as PW-3.

The memorandum statement record that Aman Jat lead the
panch witnesses and the investigating team to Kevdi Van behind
Dental College, Panchavati, Nashik, and when the vehicle was

Ashish
18/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

stopped in front of River View Apartment, he lead to a black colour
motorcycle of Hero Honda Company parked in the parking lot which
was seized.

He also lead the investigating team to Flat No.1 in the
apartment and by climbing on the cot, Aman Jat produced one
memory card and sword-stick from the false ceiling. The said articles
were seized by preparing seizure panchanama which bear the
signature of PW-3 as well as the other panch and the investigating
officer.

Similarly, on arrest of Chetan Pagare (Accused No.1), on the
very same day i.e. on 15/06/2013, he expressed his willingness while
in custody of the police to give a memorandum statement leading to
production of the articles which were kept in the flat of Aman Jat.
The memorandum panchanama prepared under Section 27 of the
Indian Evidence Act (Exhibit-123) is brought on record by the
prosecution through one of the panch witness being examined as PW-

When the panch witnesses, along with the team of the police
officers at the directions of the accused reached Nav Akash building,
the accused lead them to flat no.11, which was locked. The police
broke open the lock and the accused lead the team to the kitchen and
from loft of the kitchen, he produced 19 articles, which included a 14
inch blood stained knife (Article-17), blue colour jeans with blood
stains (Article-19), cream colour tracksuit with blood stains, one blue
jeans (Article-19), cream colour T-shirt, pieces of cello-tape (Article-

29), pieces of shoelace (Article-23), four pieces of handkerchief
(Article-24), 2 watches (Article-25), I-card of Bhujbal Knowledge

Ashish
19/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

City (Article-27), one steel water bottle (Article-26), one receipt from
Mumbai Education Trust (Article-28) and one sack bag (Article-22).

All the articles were sealed and when the panch witness
stepped into the witness-box, he identified all the articles, including
the knife (Article 17). The other articles seized through the
memorandum panchanama from accused Chetan Pagare were
identified by Gulabchand (PW-9) and this included article 27-Bhujbal
Knowledge City College Identity card, college notebook, bus pass
(Article 39), steel water bottle (Article 26), two watches (Article 25),
a sack bag (Article 22). The Articles which were discovered and
seized from Chetan Pagare were identified by the panch witness in
the Court.

19. The weapons, which were discovered at the instance of the
accused, Chetan Pagare and Aman Jat, were presented in a sealed
condition to the Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nashik city, seeking
his opinion, as to whether the injuries sustained by the deceased
could have been caused by the said weapons. The said
communication (Exhibit-158) is brought on record through PW-11,
the Medical Officer.

He deposed before the Court that on receipt of the Exhibit-158
along with the sealed parcel, on its opening, he found two weapons;
one being a knife and the other sword-stick. PW-11 examined the
weapons and, he drew the diagrams, which was brought on record as
figure-1 and figure-2, which described the dimensions of the weapon
(Exhibit-159) and (Exhibit-160). As per the doctor, on examination
of the weapons, he found blood stains on its handle and blade.



Ashish
                                       20/71            Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

On examining the weapon, he gave his opinion, (Exhibit-161)
and with reference to the weapon and the injuries by the deceased
and, he specifically deposed thus:-

“In my opinion, after matching the injuries present on the body of the
deceased as mentioned in the postmortem report No.1190 conducted by Dr. S.P.
Datir, it was found that injury Nos.1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18,
19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 are consistent with being caused by sharp
edged pointed weapon as in Fig Nos. 1 and 2. I also opine that death in this case
was consequent upon the injuries sustained by the deceased. Accordingly,
opinion was given by me. It bears my signature. Its contents are true and correct.
It is marked as Exhibit-161.”

20. As per the doctor, after examination, the weapons were
repacked and resealed and handed over to the concerned person of
the Police Station. Before the Court, he was again shown the
weapons (Article-17 and Article A-15) which he compared to the
figures drawn by him as figure-1 (Exhibit-159) and figure-2 (Exhibit-

160).

The Medical Officer, therefore, confirmed that the injuries
sustained by deceased Vipin were caused by the two weapons, which
were discovered at the instance of accused nos.1 and 2 through a
memorandum panchanama drawn under Section 27 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, which was proved by the two witnesses during
the trial.

21. In addition to the recovery from the accused nos.1 and 2, the
prosecution has also relied upon the recovery of wallet belonging to
the deceased at the instance of accused no.4, Sanjay Pawar, and the
Memorandum Panchnama (Exhibit-127) pursuant to the arrest of
Sanjay on 15/06/2013 lead to the discovery of a wallet, which was
kept below the cot in his house situated in Bhagwanpura, near

Ashish
21/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Hanuman Temple. Sanjay took out the wallet which contained receipt
of dance academy, students’ monthly ST bus pass, one passport size
photograph, one copy of driving licence, one certificate of technical
institute. In presence of the panch, the police seized the wallet and the
things in polythene bag and by adopting the procedure, the same was
seized.

Santosh Zanjari, the panch on Exhibit-127 identified the
articles, i.e. the wallet (Article 30), driving licence (Article 31),
Passport size photographs (Article 32), ST Bus pass (Article 33) the
dance academy receipt (Article 34), and the technical institute
certificate (Article 35). It is pertinent to note that PW-9 Gulabchand,
father of Vipin also identified Exhibit-31, 32, 34, 35.

22. The prosecution also relied upon the discovery of Nokia
company mobile phone belonging to the deceased, from accused no.3
Akshay Sule, which was given to him by Chetan Pagare and on his
arrest he showed his willingness to produce the mobile phone
concealed by him in his house. The memorandum panchnama
Exhibit-133 is produced before the trial court through PW-6, Mohan
Shinde, one of the panchas to the said memorandum and who
accompanied the police team, who proceeded towards the house of
Akshay Sule accused no.3. The Memorandum Panchnama record that
on entering the house, Akshay went to one room, opened the door of
a wooden cupboard and produced a mobile of Nokia company with
black colour without a SIM card.

The mobile phone was seized and its I.M.E.I Number was
noted to be ‘354866024450047’.



Ashish
                                22/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

There is also recovery of clothes of the deceased from accused
no.5, Pummy Chaudhari, through memorandum panchnama (Exhibit-

137) proved by panch witness Ritesh Kothadiya.

Pummy Chaudhari, expressed her willingness to produce the
clothes worn by Vipin, who was brought to her place by Aman. She
accompanied the panch witness and the investigating team to her
house and removed one black colour pant and white t-shirt from the
iron cupboard in which she had concealed them. From the pant
pocket, one monthly bus pass and one passport size photograph was
recovered, and the clothes and the articles came to be seized and
sealed. The monthly bus pass (Article 39), and the passport size
photograph (Article 40), were identified by the panch witness along
with the clothes i.e. Article 37 and 38.

PW-9 Gulabchand also identified Article 39-bus pass and the
passport size photograph- Article 40.

23. In addition to the aforesaid recovery of articles, one more
circumstance brought on record by the prosecution is the evidence
about the accused leading the investigating team to the site, where the
incident had taken place. Accused Aman Jat, on being arrested,
expressed his desire to disclose the place and one Narayan Ghadge
(PW-8) acted as a panch. In the custody of the police, Aman lead the
team to Nav Jeevan Building No.12 and in particular flat no.11. He
also lead the investigating team to Adgaon Shivar, and a panchanama
was prepared (Exhibit-140).

24. With the aforesaid evidence being brought before the trial
court, the prosecution established the chain of circumstances,

Ashish
23/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

commencing from the disappearance of Vipin Bafna on 8/06/2013
and his body being discovered on 14/06/2013. By relying upon the
testimony of PW-18 Hemant Deokar, who had seen the accused and
the deceased together on 9/06/2013 and through PW-17 Mayur
Kurhade who had seen Vipin being confined by accused nos.1 and 2
in the flat and he was threatened to not disclose the said incident to
anyone, the prosecution has managed to establish the chain of
circumstances leading to the inference that the deceased Vipin was
kidnapped by the accused nos.1 & 2, and after that he was confined
by them in a flat belonging to Aman Jat and the evidence brought on
record by the prosecution has conclusively established that the
deceased Vipin was in the custody of the accused nos.1 and 2. The
flat No.11 situated in Nav Akash building No.12 was taken on rent
by Aman Jat and this is established by the prosecution by examining
Avinash Tandale (PW-16) who deal in the business of purchase and
sale of flats and plots and letting out flats on rent. It is he who gave
the flat of his maternal uncle on rent to Aman Jat in April, 2013. He
has specifically deposed that Aman Jat used to stay there and he
identified him in the Court.

25. The circumstance that the deceased Vipin was in confinement
of accused nos.1 and 2 is also established through the memory card
which is recovered by drawing memorandum panchnama under
Section 27 from Aman Jat – accused no.2. Memory card which was
seized during the investigation, was forwarded to Forensic Science
Laboratory, Kalina along with the letter from the Investigating
Officer.




Ashish
                                24/71       Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

PW-23 Abhijeet Belekar, the police constable is the carrier,
who carried the muddemal i.e. two memory cards and one sealed
photograph of Vipin Bafna to the Forensic Science Laboratory. In the
cross-examination, he categorically admitted that the muddemal
given to him was placed in his possession and it was valuable. On the
muddemal being handed over, he proceeded to Mumbai by
Panchavati Express along with the letter and the muddemal.

Exhibit-194, is the query report seeking comments on the
shooting/recording in the memory card and also inquring as to how
many clips were comprised in the memory card and whether video
therein was recorded by mobile camera or video shooting camera. A
query was also raised whether the person seen in the video clipping is
Vipin Bafna, whose photograph was also forwarded.

For the purposes of carrying out the examination two new
memory cards (MICRO SD HC Card 2 GB of JV gold company) in
red colour packet in sealed condition was also forwarded.

PW-24 police constable, buckle no.195, attached to Panchavati
Police Station, also carried seized muddemal in sealed condition
along with the letters to forensic science laboratory, Nashik and he
deposited the seized muddemal.

26. The muddemal, which included the memory card (MICRO SD-
capacity 1 GB) along with the two photographs were received by
Sandip Patil (PW-26) working as Scientific Officer in Forensic
Science Laboratory, Kallina.

PW-26 admitted that the said muddemal was sent in a sealed
packet and received in the laboratory on 18/06/2013, and he started

Ashish
25/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

analysis of the muddemal from 03/09/2013 and submitted his report
on 25/09/2013. As per PW-26, upon analysis of the muddemal it was
sealed and sent back to the concerned police station, and from the
receipt of the muddemal till its dispatch, it was preserved properly in
the exhibit room and he also produced before the court the chain of
custody of the muddemal bearing his signature.

27. PW No.26 prepared a clone copy of the memory card bearing
Sr. No. 0929004118078 with the help of an authorised software.
While analysing the memory card, he found three videos; first video
found was of 09/06/2013 recorded at 12.27 noon, second video of the
same date recorded at 12.37 pm and third video of 13/06/2013
recorded at 4.31 p.m.

According to the expert witness, he did not find anything to
have been tampered, nor did he find any human error while analysing
the same.

He compared the photograph, which was forwarded to him
along with the letter and he analysed and compared the same with the
video clips and found that the person in the photograph was the same
as in the video clip. PW-26 affirmed that the photograph and
memory card of which he had done analysis could be identified by
him. He was also shown the seal of the Forensic Science Laboratory
and he identified the same.

Though this witness deposed that he had prepared CD of the
memory card, it was not exhibited.

Since in witness box, he deposed that he had bought the
original MICRO SD card, which he had examined, he was allowed to

Ashish
26/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

play the same before the Court and three video clips were seen.

When the Memory Card was run before the Court, which
according to him, was filed in the Court, it was found to contained
three video clips. In cross-examination, PW-26, however, admitted
that he had not issued any 65-B certificate while he undertook the
cloning of the memory card and he also admitted that the police had
not sent him the panchnama in respect of the hatch value.

28. Exhibit-215, the examination report of the memory card is
exhibited through the said witness where it was clearly opined as
below :-

“The male in photographs provided for reference in Ex-2(Ex-2/1 and Ex-
2/2) is found in the present video files, found in the memory card in Ex-1, by
susceptible visual analysis.”

The contents of the memory card is a crucial evidence relied
upon by the prosecution. The memory card in respect of the video
recording carried out by Aman Jat was seized from him while he was
in police custody under the provisions of Section 27 of the Evidence
Act. The Investigating Officer also obtained a report from the FSL
about the memory card and the report was submitted to the
Investigating Officer (Exhibit-215) which referred to the three video
files; two videos recorded on 09/6/2013 and the third video recorded
on 13/6/2013. The Investigating Officer prepared a panchnama about
the contents of the memory card on 7/10/2013 (Exhibit-103). The
said panchnama is exhibited through one of the panch witness Manoj
Patani, examined as PW-3, as he acted as a panch, when Aman Jat
expressed his willingness to produce the memory card in which the
video clip of the deceased was recorded by him and this was
recovered from a flat in River View Apartment, and it was found to

Ashish
27/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

be concealed on the false ceiling of the room.

The same being seized and sealed, it was forwarded to the
Forensic Analysis, Kallina, and the Memory card along with the CD
and clone Memory Card were received from the Forensic Analysis
Department in different sealed packets and the Investigating Officer
deemed it appropriate to open the sealed packets and examine its
contents by playing it on the computer. For this purpose, a separate
panchnama was drawn (Exhibit-103) which bear the signature of the
Investigating Officer Shri Pingle (PW-37). The panchnama also make
reference to the photographs of the deceased forwarded for
comparison with the videos in the memory card and the Micro SD, 2
GB memory card was played with the help of the computer and
various screen shots of its contents were obtained.

The panchnama referred to a folder ‘video’ and one Annexure
‘CY-285-13’ a word document folder. In Annexure ‘CY-285-13’
three pages were found of which the printouts were taken and page
no.1 comprised of two photographs of Vipin Bafna forwarded for
investigation (Exhibit 2/1 and Exhibit 2/2).

Next to the same, is a photo print taken from the video after
processing, in which Vipin is seen with a piece of cloth stuck in his
mouth and his hands tied behind. On page no.2, the photograph of
Vipin at Exhibit 2/1 and Exhibit 2/2 is compared with the photo print
from the video where Vipin Bafna is seen sitting, whereas on page
no.3, Vipin Bafna is seen with a locket hanging around his neck with
‘OM’.





Ashish
                                28/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

One file, bearing no.09062013007, which was found in Excel
file, was clicked when Vipin Bafna is seen conversing and from the
conversation which form part of the panchnama, Vipin is giving
narration about the incident of the previous day when he had
accompanied his uncle to the hospital and then he went to attend his
classes. He is heard mentioning about a phone call received from one
girl and when he was called to meet her, he went to Panchavati
College, but found no one there, but at that time, Chetan arrived on a
motorcycle and asked to accompany him.

In the video, Vipin then narrate as to how he was confined and
told not to leave the flat where he was taken by Chetan and he was
told that he was kidnapped. Stating that initially he thought it was a
joke, but he was told to demand money from his father and he told
them that his father do not have money, but his uncle has. He is then
asked to connect the phone to his father and money was demanded.

There is a long narration from Vipin himself, when he spoke
exhaustively as to why he was confined and by whom. Thereafter,
the video is continued in another file where Vipin speak of the threat
received by him from Chetan and he is heard lamenting since he was
confined.

29. The panchnama further open file 12062013013, where Vipin is
seen sitting near the wall with white shirt having black buttons and
black pant with a white tape being fastened to his mouth and his
hands tied at the back and even his legs tied with a black rope.

Chetan Pagare is also seen on the mattress with his face
towards the wall and one person with blue pant, full shirt of a stout

Ashish
29/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

built is also seen who is informed to be Mayur Khurade (PW-17).

The panchnama was prepared when the video clips were
played in presence of the uncle of Vipin; Shri Kishor Bafna and he
identified his nephew in the video.

The Investigating Officer, in his deposition, has spoken about
the panchnama (Exhibit-103) by stating that to observe the contents
of the memory card, he had taken help of Cyber expert, Vikas Naik
and screen shots were taken of the visuals (Exhibit 96).

He categorically deposed that in all the photographs, which
were drawn on the basis of the video, Vipin Bafna was seen and it
was evident that he was confined and an adhesive tape was fixed on
his mouth and his hands and legs were tied.

30. The prosecution has, therefore, successfully established that till
13/06/2013, Vipin was alive and he was in confinement and Vipin
was made to talk and the video was recorded, where he spoke about
the confinement and the demand of money since he was kidnapped.
This recording was done by Aman Jat and the memory card in which
the recording was done, was seized under recovery panchnama under
Section 27 of the Evidence Act, and seizure is duly proved.

31. Another relevant circumstance, which has been brought on
record by the prosecution to incriminate the accused Aman, is the
CDR records. Deceased Vipin, who was using mobile number
7588195484 repeatedly received phone calls on 07/06/2013 and
08/06/2013 from one mobile number 7773989300. The prosecution
has led evidence before the Trial Judge that mobile number
7773989300 was used by Aman Jat. This fact is established by

Ashish
30/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

examining one Praful Tekade (PW-27). According to the said witness,
the mobile which was being used by him with two SIM cards, one in
his mother’s name and another in name of Rameshwar Wad was
stolen on 14/04/2013, when he went to watch the procession being
taken out at Nashik Road on account of Dr. Ambedkar Jayanti.
Since he got late he went to sleep on the station itself and when he
woke up on the next day, he found that his mobile was stolen. He did
not lodge any complaint in that regard, but on 10/06/2013, when he
was present in a marriage ceremony, the officials from Washim
Police Station inquired from him about the details of his mobile.
Upon he being called by Washim police station in relation to his
mobile, thinking that his mobile has been tracked, he reported to the
Panchavati police station on 13/06/2013.

PW-27 established before the Court that SIM card No.
7773989300 is in the name of his mother and he produced form no.
6922094 (Article 44) to establish the same.

32. Since the mobile phone of Praful Tekade, which was stolen,
had another SIM card in it and it belonged to Rameshwar Wad, he is
also examined by the prosecution as a witness.

PW-28 deposed that he purchased a mobile phone and inserted
idea company SIM card into it with the number 9011972139. While
procuring the said number, he had provided his ration card and
voter’s card to the service provider. However, his mobile was broken
and therefore, he gave the SIM card to Praful Tekade (PW-27) for use
and since then he was using the same.





Ashish
                                 31/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

PW-28 corroborate Praful’s version that when he was sleeping
at the station after witnessing the Jayanti celebration, his mobile was
lost and according to him, this information was given to Nashik
Police.

33. The informant, the father of the deceased Gulabchand (PW-9)
also informed the police and even deposed before the Court that on
13/06/2013, at about 6:06 p.m., he received a phone call from mobile
number 9011972139 and this is the same SIM card, which was
procured by Rameshwar Wad (PW-28) for his own use but was given
to Praful Tekade (PW-27), whose mobile phone was stolen with both
the SIM card numbers 7773989300 as well as 9011972139 in it, the
mobile being stolen on 14/04/2013.

34. During the course of investigation, a requisition letter was sent
for receiving the call detail record (CDR) in respect of two mobile
numbers i.e. 7588195484 belonging to deceased Vipin and
7588195483 used by Gulabchand the father of the victim on whose
mobile the call for ransom was made.

Nodal Officer from BSNL, Vikas Mali, collected the call
details, a customer application form of the mobile numbers, and
certified the same by providing 65-B certificate and furnished the
relevant information to the DCB Crime Branch, Nashik, Vikas Mali
was examined by the prosecution as PW-35 to produce the CDRs.

35. The prosecution has relied upon the evidence of one
Radhakisan Gaikwad an owner of mobile shop at Bhimnagar, Nashik,
being run in the name ‘Sahil Enterprises’. He was indulging in
mobile repairing and dealing in sale and purchase of secondhand

Ashish
32/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

mobile handsets. It was his modus operandi to receive a mobile
phone for repairing and putting a chit on the mobile handset by
writing the name of the owner, the I.M.E.I number, and the amount to
be paid for its repairing. Chit was affixed along with the mobile, and
when the owner came to get his mobile back, it was handed over on
receipt of the amount, and while returning home, the chit was then
destroyed.

36. In June, 2013, inquiries were made with him in regard to one
NOKIA Company Model 1200 and PW-22 received the mobile for
repairing, and though he could not remember the name of the person
who brought the mobile, he noted the I.M.E.I. number and the
amount on the chit also mentioned the repairing charges as Rs. 300/-.
He repaired the mobile, but the owner did not come to the shop.

He, therefore, put the mobile handset for sale and one customer
came to the shop and purchased the mobile and while selling the
mobile, the chit affixed with it was removed, and he wrote the name
of the purchaser on it.

As per the owner of the shop, there was no SIM card in the
mobile, but he scribed the name of the purchaser as ‘Aman’ who took
away the mobile. Radhakisan produced the chit Exhibit-95, where he
wrote the name of Aman with the make of the mobile and the I.M.E.I
number.

In the witness-box before the Court, he identified the mobile
(Article 36) which was sold by him to one Aman.

Article 36 (a mobile of NOKIA company of black colour) was
seized, vide memorandum drawn under Section 27 from accused no.



Ashish
                                33/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

3 Akshay Sule and PW 6, who acted as panch on the memorandum
panchnama identified the mobile which was recovered from Akshay
Sule.

37. The Investigating Officer deposed before the Court that during
investigation, it transpired that 9 mobiles of witnesses and 5 mobiles
of the accused persons were put to use and he had sought the CDR
details from the service provider by sending them appropriate
requisition and that was brought on record through the Nodal officers
of the two service provider companies along with the certificate
under Section 65-B.

38. The Investigating Officer (PW-37) deposed that Praful Tekade
was using two numbers in a handset with dual SIM card and this
mobile handset was stolen.

He also deposed that Radhakisan Gaikwad sold secondhand
mobile set to Aman Jat and Aman Jat used this mobile for making
phone calls to Vipin Bafna and even the phone call made by Vipin
Bafna by using the mobile phone of his friend Yogesh Kadam, the
SIM used was 7773989300 and this was in the mobile handset with
I.M.E.I. No. 357993031858470. This is the same I.M.E.I. Number to
be found on Exhibit-95.

This aforesaid fact is deposed by the Investigating officer
based on the testimony of evidence of PW-34 Dattaram Aangre,
Nodal officer with Vodafone Idea Ltd, when he produced the CDR of
the numbers, which were furnished to him and this included the
telephone numbers from which the phone calls were received by the
deceased Vipin and his father. The CDR (Exhibit-262) established

Ashish
34/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

that the mobile number 7773989300 which was used for calling the
number 7588195484 (Vipin Bafna) was made by using a mobile with
I.M.E.I. number. 357993031858470.

39. From Exhibit-262, prosecution has succeeded in establishing
that mobile number 7773989300 has been used by Aman Jat to make
consistent phone calls to the deceased on his phone, and this SIM was
used in a mobile phone with the I.M.E.I. number, which was
confirmed by PW-22, when he stated that he had sold his mobile with
the said I.M.E.I. number to Aman.

Through the Nodal officer, it is also brought on record that
phone calls were made by Aman Jat from SIM number 9511271313
on the mobile phone used by Chetan Pagare, who was using number
9764585333. From the CDR’s it is evident that the various accused
persons and in specific Aman Jat and Chetan Pagare, were in touch
with each other before and during the time when Vipin was in their
confinement.

40. The details of the mobile number 9764585333 used by Chetan
Pagare is brought on record by the prosecution through PW-25,
Harshal Shirapure, who informed the investigating agency and also
deposed before the Court that the SIM card 9764585333 was in the
name of his brother Ganesh Shirapure and he had taken the SIM card
and used it for two to three days, but Chetan Pagare, accused no.1
liked the number and therefore he took it from him for his use at the
end of 2011 and he was using the SIM card. He also deposed that
when he requested to return back the same, he blankly refused by
informing that he was using the SIM card. Considering his
antecedents, he did not insist for receiving it back. Thus the

Ashish
35/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

prosecution has also succeeded in establishing that the phone calls
made by Aman Jat on SIM No. 9764585333 were made to Chetan,
the co-accused.

41. The prosecution is also successful in establishing the tower
location of the phone calls exchanged between the accused no.2
Aman Jat and the deceased as well as PW-9, the informant. PW-34,
was shown the details of mobile number 7773989300 and
9011972139 which the prosecution has established to have been put
to use by Aman Jat.

He deposed that the first number was registered in the name of
Sunita Tekade, mother of Praful Tekade (PW-27), whereas the second
number was in the name of Rameshwar Wad (PW-28). In the witness-
box, he offered explanation of the CDR, which he had produced
(Exhibit-262 and 263). He also produced the tower location list with
cell id (Exhibit-264) and with its reference, he indicated the cell id
address in the said Exhibit and with reference to Exhibit-262 and 263
i.e. the phone calls made by Aman Jat to the deceased Vipin and the
phone call made by him to the father of the deceased PW-9, and he
deposed thus:-

“8. I am now referred Exh.262. Most of the calling on
08/06/2013 is done to mobile number 7588195484 from 7773989300. The tower
location is 40422-10037-1771. This tower is situated at Plot No. 52, Parvati
Smruti, Wadala-Pathardi road, Vinaynagar, Nashik. The radius of one tower in
city is ranging from 400 meters to one kilometer and in rural area, radius is 5 to
6 kms. On 07/06/2013, most of the calls are made to 7588195484 from the
mobile mentioned in column No.1. On 23/05/2013, there is only one call between
these two mobile numbers. IMEI in column No. 9 is of mobile number mentioned
in column No.1.

9. I am now referred Exh.263. It is with respect to
mobile number 9011972139. There was call from the said mobile number to
mobile No. 7588195483 on 13/06/2013. The tower location was 40422-10037-

227. This tower location was at Madhu Plaza, near Patil Garden, 100 feet
highway link road in Indiranagar.”

Ashish
36/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

42. The relevant exhibits being proved through PW-34, the Nodal
Officer Vodafone Idea Limited has thus established the case of the
prosecution that Aman Jat established contact with the deceased and
persuaded him to join his company and he was in constant touch with
Vipin even before the day when he was kidnapped. He also made a
phone call to the father of deceased demanding ransom on
13/06/2013, on his mobile number 7588195483.

It is also established by prosecution that the tower location of
the two phone calls is distinct as PW-9 was residing at some other
place and not in the close proximity of Aman Jat. Thus, the
involvement of two accused in the offence of kidnapping of Vipin for
ransom and causing his death and throwing his body at the location
from which it is recovered is established through reliable evidence.

Accused Nos.1 and 2, were also seen to be in touch through the
mobile and SIM card used by Chetan Pagare was taken by him from
Harshal (PW-25).

43. In the CDR, it is also noted that there is a phone call made by
Hemant Deokar (PW-18), the Rikshaw driver, who had seen the
accused and deceased together, and this phone call is made by him on
SIM number 9511271313. He made three phone calls, all on June 9,
2013, at 19.30.01, 19.50.34, 19.54.31 hours.

It is PW-18 who had deposed that, when he was waiting at the
Rickshaw Stand between 9 to 9:15 p.m., Chetan Pagare, Akshay Sule,
and Sanjay Pawar with one slim person approached him. Aman Jat
was behind the temple and Hemant called Aman from his mobile. He
has admitted in the chief examination that he gave a phone call on

Ashish
37/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

number 9511271313 and on he giving a call, Aman Jat came near the
Rickshaw and told that the beddings have to be carried to the flat.
The beddings being picked up from Aman Jat’s flat in area of
Kevdipant, River view Apartment, they were carried to building
no.12 Nav Akash Apartment, Nishant Garden. The beddings were
carried by Chetan Pagare, Aman and Vipin.

The testimony of PW-18 also established that Aman Jat was
using mobile number 9511271313 from which number he made
phone calls on multiple occasions to Chetan Pagare. The CDR have
established the repeated connect between the two accused persons.
Apart from this, mobile number 9511271313 was also put to use
when Mayur Kurhade (PW-17) who had seen Vipin in confinement
in a Flat, where he found him in the company of accused nos.1 and 2.
PW-17 has also deposed that on 12/06/2013, Chetan Pagare had
called him from mobile of Aman Jat and he specifically gave the
number 9511271313 from which he received a call on his mobile
number 9226750226 and Chetan Pagare talked to him and asked him
to carry his motorcycle Hero Honda and bring it to the flat of Aman
Jat near Panchavati college and he abided. This witness has also
corroborated the case of the prosecution that mobile number
9511271313, which was in the name of PW-22 Radhakisan Gaikwad,
the mobile shop owner, was used by Aman. Though, it has not been
established by the prosecution as to how this SIM card came in
possession of Aman Jat as PW-22 denied that he handed over the said
SIM card to Aman. Though he admitted that he has various SIM
cards in his name and they do not remember handing over the said
SIM card to Aman. However, it is worth to note that in the statement

Ashish
38/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

of this witness recorded under Section 164 before the Magistrate on
02/08/2013, he had stated that two and half months back, a mobile
phone of NOKIA company 1200 model had come for repairing to
him and the person who gave him for repairing did not return. Since
the money did not come, he sold the mobile to one Aman Jat and
since he had no documents for procuring the SIM, he gave him a SIM
card which was in his name. He also categorically deposed that when
he read in the newspaper about the Bafna case, he has given his
statement to the Magistrate and he would identify the person to
whom he has sold the mobile, though he did not identify him in
Court and denied knowing him when he stepped into the witness-box.

In order to lend credence to the case of the prosecution the
statement of PW-22, Radhakishan Pandurang Gaikwad, PW-27,
Praful Tekade and PW-28 Rameshwar Vad was recorded before the
Magistrate under Section 164.

44. Apart from the depositions and the version of the prosecution
witnesses, the prosecution has relied upon the inquest panchnama
(Exhibit 77) as well as the postmortem notes (Exhibit 162). The
inquest panchnama is brought on record through PW-1 Gangaram
Shelar, who while proceeding to the field, saw one dead body lying in
the field of one Salunkhe and the dead body was identified to be of
Vipin Bafna.

The inquest panchnama (Exhibit-77) record that there were
injuries on the left and right hand, both side of the back below the
waist, and the dead body had black colour T-shirt on his person. The
panchnama also record that the death has occurred due to injuries
sustained by sharp weapon on back, arm and other places on the

Ashish
39/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

body.

The prosecution has also relied upon the postmortem report
(Exhibit 159), which is brought on record through PW-11 Dr. Pawar,
in which the cause of death is opined to be on account of multiple
stab injuries and multiple rupture of organs, and though he is not the
author of the postmortem report, on the basis of the said report, when
he stepped in the witness-box, he opined about the injuries being
caused by sharp edged pointed weapon in figure 1 and 2, and also
opined that the death was the consequence of the injuries sustained
by the deceased. He gave his specific opinion in that regard in
Exhibit 161 in the form of weapon examination.

We have already discussed about the recovery of these
weapons from the accused persons.

45. Prosecution has also relied upon the panchnama of the place,
where the deceased was confined and the same is brought on record
by one of the panch to the said panchnama same is brought on record
through one of the panch (PW-10).

It is the accused Chetan Pagare, who lead the policy machinery
to the said place while he was in custody of police and the
investigating team with the panchas proceeded to NavAkash building
and the accused lead them to Flat No. 12, where the panchnama was
prepared, which along with the map of the flat, is also brought on
record.

46. One more circumstance, on which the prosecution has placed
reliance is the examination of Chetan Pagare by the Doctor in the
Casualty Department in the Civil Hospital in the night of 14/06/2013.



Ashish
                                40/71         Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

The patient was brought by PSI Deore of Panchavati Police
Station with an injury on his index finger, middle finger and incised
wound on middle one third little finger. The patient gave the history
that he was injured by way of knife on 13/06/2013, at 7:30 to 8:00
p.m.

As per PW-12, all the injuries were caused by sharp weapon
and the age of injuries was more than 24 hours.

By examining the said witness, the prosecution has attempted
to establish that there was a possibility that a scuffle took place in the
incident when the deceased was done to death and since accused
Chetan was present, he sustained an injury and the injury, according
to the Doctor, was 24 hours old and caused by a knife. It is in light of
the aforesaid evidence brought before the Sessions Judge, that he
convicted the two accused persons Aman Jat, and Chetan Pagare and
acquitted the other three accused persons.

47. The finding of conviction recorded in the impugned judgment,
is based on the analysis of the evidence led by the prosecution before
the Trial Judge in establishing the guilt of the two accused persons,
Chetan Pagare and Aman Jat. It is conclusively established by the
prosecution that they kidnapped victim Vipin for ransom, and then
caused his death by use of deadly weapons i.e. knife & sword-stick
and removed his body to an isolated place, so that the crime
committed by them do not come to light. The chain of circumstances
brought on record by the prosecution, with the evidence of the
deceased found in the company of the two accused, by PW-17,
Mayur Kurhade, as well as the rikshaw driver, who had seen the
deceased in the company of the accused i.e. Hemant Deokar, along

Ashish
41/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

with the phone calls made from the mobile of the deceased as well as
the mobile phone used by Aman Jat along with the circumstance as to
how Aman came in possession of the two SIM cards from which the
phone calls for ransom were made to PW-9, as well as the mobile
phones were used to establish contact with the deceased Vipin as well
as the contact being established between the accused persons
themselves have been painstakingly brought on record by the
prosecution. The seizure of the incriminating articles under the
recovery panchanama at the instance of the accused Chetan Pagare
leading to recovery of knife and recovery of clothes stained with
blood and recovery of article like piece of towel recovered from the
spot matching with the pieces of towel recovered at the instance of
Chetan Pagare has been held to be incriminating circumstances to
record the finding of guilt against him.

Similarly, as far as accused no.2 Aman Jat is concerned, on the
basis of the CDR report and on the basis of the testimony of PW-22
and PW-27, the prosecution has brought on record the use of NOKIA
1200 handset with IMEI Number, which has established that Aman
Jat had made phone calls to the deceased as well as to the father of
the deceased demanding ransom. Recovery of the memory card
(Article-16) under the Memorandum Panchanama and the sword-
stick (Article-15) had also established his involvement in the subject
crime and prosecution has also established that it is this accused who
had hired the flat to give effect to the conspiracy of kidnapping Vipin,
son of PW-9 and for extorting the money from him.

48. With the consistent and reliable evidence brought on record
against accused nos.1 and 2, the learned trial judge reached a

Ashish
42/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

conclusion that the custody of Vipin on he being abducted remained
with accused nos.1 and 2, till his body was discovered and the motive
for commission of crime was the demand of ransom which though
made was not satisfied as PW-9 approached the police station
immediately on receiving the threatening calls. Based on the
evidence, the trial judge held that there was sufficient evidence on
record and a conclusion was reached that deceased Vipin was done to
death with accused nos.1 and 2, although the charge under MCOCA
was not proved and therefore all the accused persons stood convicted
of the said charge.

49. We concur the conclusion arrived at by the learned Trial Judge
and confirm the findings recorded in the impugned judgment as
regards the guilt of the two accused persons and that they are
responsible for causing death of Vipin which has been established
through cogent and reliable circumstantial evidence, which inspire
confidence, as the witnesses speak in sync with each other and the
chain of circumstances brought on record established that it is the
accused nos.1 and 2, who have committed the offence under Section
302 r/w 34 of IPC and it is these two accused, who have kidnapped
the deceased with an intention to extract the amount from his father
and therefore their guilt under Section 364-A, 343, 506 r/w 34 of IPC
was also established.

50. The learned Public Prosecutor, Ms. Dabholkar, in support of
the reference for confirmation of the death sentence imposed upon
the two accused persons, would submit that five accused faced charge
in the trial for kidnapping a 22 year old lad, and for confining him for
5 days and thereafter, murdering him for ransom. Out of the five,

Ashish
43/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

three came to be acquitted and accused no.1 Chetan Pagare and
accused no.2 Aman Jat are convicted.

According to Ms. Dabholkar, the charge-sheet compiled the
relevant material establishing the involvement of the accused and
charge was framed on 11/01/2017. She would submit that the
investigation reveal the modus operandi of the accused, being to
befriend the deceased, coax him into accompanying them by pre-
planning and arranging resources, and then executing the plan of
extortion of ransom from his father. According to her, the deceased
was acquainted with accused no.1 and 2, which made it easier for
them to threaten his father and also to eliminate him when the
demand was not fulfilled. It is her specific submission that both the
accused persons, who were sentenced to death, have criminal
antecedents as various offences are registered against them and
therefore, they had the mental setup for planning and executing a
crime. For advancing their intent and purpose according to her, Aman
hired a flat with the help of an agent and he also purchased a mobile
from Radhakisan Gaikwad (PW-22) without a SIM, without using
any of his document, but the document of Gaikwad were put to use.
One mobile phone was also stolen from Praful Tekade (PW-27) from
the Railway Station, which had two SIM cards; one in the name of
his mother and other in the name of his friend. It is the other accused,
Chetan who collected knife, rope, cello-tape, etc., and that is how the
two accused persons arranged the resources for giving effect to their
planning.

Thereafter, call was made to the deceased from SIM Card
Number 7773989300 from 23/05/2013 on his mobile number and

Ashish
44/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

they befriended the deceased and invited him to the hired flat on
8/06/2013, and then he was confined in the flat. He was made to
change the clothes and his clothes were left in the flat of accused
no.5, and thereafter, he was taken to the flat of Aman hired through
PW-16, and then attempt was made to extract money from his father
on the pretext of his abduction, but when they realized that the
ransom amount is not coming and when a police complaint was
lodged, the victim was done to death.

51. Taking us through the entire evidence brought on record by the
prosecution in form of circumstantial evidence comprising of the
electronic evidence, medical evidence, as well as the oral testimony
of the witnesses, including the relatives and independent witnesses,
she would submit that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing
chain of circumstances, which do not leave any single ground
consistent with the innocence of the accused and the chain is so
clinching that it only point out to the two accused persons and this
aspect was rightly appreciated by the learned Trial Judge, who
recorded a finding of their guilt and in absence of any reliable
evidence as regards the three other accused persons, who faced the
charge, they came to be acquitted. According to the learned APP, the
electronic evidence brought on record has also fully established the
case of the prosecution and the Investigating Officers, (PW-33 36,

37) have specifically deposed about the manner in which
investigation was carried out and the material collated to establish the
guilt of the accused.

According to the Ms.Dabholkar, the evidence presented by the
prosecution fully established the guilt of the accused beyond

Ashish
45/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

reasonable doubt, and the learned Judge has also specifically
recorded the reasons for handing over death sentence to the two
accused for committing the offence which according to him was
grave and serious and by striking a balance between aggravating an
mitigating circumstances, a conclusion was reached that the case fall
within the category of ‘Rarest of Rare’. The nine aggravating
circumstances, are enlisted by the learned Judge, and in the wake of
the brutality and heinousness of the offence, with no regard for
human life, they were compared against the mitigating circumstances
available, only two in number; the young age of the accused and
absence of intention to commit the crime.

In light of the aforesaid material, it is the case of
Ms. Dabholkar that the death sentence imposed under the impugned
judgment against accused nos.1 and 2, deserve to be confirmed.

52. The learned counsel, Mr. Satpute, representing Chetan, accused
No.1, has argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case
based on circumstantial evidence as the circumstances must be so
placed against one another that it would not lead to any other
inference than the guilt of the accused. He is extremely critical about
the material brought on record by the prosecution through the
evidence Ganesh Rajaram Shinde (PW-35) and according to him, the
authenticity of the video clipping is not established by the
prosecution. It is also his submission that the investigating officer did
not maintain a station diary and there is no entry in the station diary
reflecting the commencement of investigation and he also did not
prepare a special report under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. According to
Mr. Satpute, the learned Trial Judge has failed to consider that the

Ashish
46/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

mobile phones, which were used were not in their name and no
evidence is brought on record to establish that the mobile was used
by the accused.

Relying upon the evidence of PW-36, who had deposed that
Chetan Pagare sustained an injury along with the evidence of
Dr. Nareshkumar Bagul (PW-12) who examined him, Mr. Satpute
would submit that there is no relevance of the injury sustained by the
accused Chetan, as it is not the case of the prosecution that some
scuffle occurred when the deceased was done to death. Mr. Satpute
would also rely upon various admissions, given by PW-37 and in
particular, his admission that he did not conduct any investigation as
to whether the mobile numbers used by the deceased and PW-9 were
in their name. The Investigating Officer, according to Mr. Satpute,
was unable to state as to why the local panchas were not called, when
the seizure panchanama was prepared, and that he has not filed
extracts of muddemal register along with the charge-sheet. According
to Mr. Satpute, the prosecution has failed to discharge the burden to
conclusively establish the guilt of the accused and therefore, the
conviction and imposition of sentence cannot be sustained.

53. The learned counsel, Mr. Pandey, representing Aman Jat, has
also pointed out the lacunae evidently appearing in the case of the
prosecution, and he would submit that as regards the recovery of the
memory card, the Scientific Officer (PW-26) admitted that he did not
find any tampering, but he did not issue a certificate under Section
65-B of the Evidence Act. Apart from this, he would submit that a
critical gap in the prosecution’s chain of circumstances is a failure to
establish the exact time of death and Dr. Pawar (PW-11), who did not

Ashish
47/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

conduct the autopsy admitted that the post mortem report contain
several lacuna, including the blank columns for dimensions and age
of injuries and according to him, the medical officer, who actually
conducted the autopsy was never examined.

Focusing his attention on the mobile numbers alleged to be
used by Aman Jat, he would submit that the SIM card number
7773989300 was in the name of Sunita Tekade, mother of PW-27,
whereas SIM card Number 9011972139 is in the name of Rameshwar
Wad (PW-18), who gave it for its use to PW-17. Another SIM card
number 9511271313 is in the name of Radhakisan Gaikwad (PW-22),
the mobile shop owner, who allegedly sold the lost mobile of PW-27
to Aman Jat, but he failed to identify Aman Jat in the Court.
Moreover, it is a submission of Mr. Pandey that prosecution has
failed to establish that these numbers were used by Aman Jat and in
its absence, the CDR records do not lend any credence to the case of
the prosecution. Further, according to him, the owner of the flat
which was hired by Aman Jat is not examined.

54. Mr. Pandey would submit that in cases of circumstantial
evidence, the chain must be so complete, so as to leave no reasonable
ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused
but in the present case, the discrepancies in the testimonies of ‘last
seen’ witnesses, the lack of Section 65-B certification for electronic
evidence, and the procedural infirmities in the recovery of articles
break the required chain of circumstances and the judgment of their
conviction and subsequent imposition of death sentence warrant an
interference at the instance of this Court in exercise of its appellate
power.


Ashish
                                      48/71           Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

55. We have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of
Additional Public Prosecutor in support of confirmation of the death
sentence, and her opposition to the Appeals raising challenge to the
judgment of conviction along with the imposition of sentence of
death. The case rests on circumstantial evidence. As early as in 1984,
the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs.
State of Maharashtra3, specified the circumstances to be satisfied
before a case against accused is said to be established from which a
conclusion of guilt is to be drawn and by relying upon the decision in
case of Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade vs. State of Maharashtra 4, the
Apex Court observed thus:-

“153. A close analysis of this decision would show that the following
conditions must be fulfilled before a case against an accused can be said to be
fully established:

(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be
fully established.

It may be noted here that this Court indicated that the circumstances concerned
“must or should” and not “may be” established. There is not only a
grammatical but a legal distinction between “may be proved” and “must be or
should be proved” as was held by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State
of Maharashtra where the observations were made:

“Certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may
be guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance between ‘may be’
and ‘must be’ is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions.”

(2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the
guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other
hypothesis except that the accused is guilty,
(3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency,
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved,
and
(5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable
ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must
show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.

154. These five golden principles, if we may say so, constitute the
panchsheel of the proof of a case based on circumstantial evidence.”


3 (1984) 4 SCC 116
4 (1973) 2 SCC 793

Ashish
                                49/71        Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

56. The aforesaid test being laid for establishing the case of the
prosecution, when there is no direct evidence available, but the
circumstances in the form of five golden principles of circumstantial
evidence constituting the panchsheel of the proof which the
prosecution must establish, the burden being cast on the prosecution
to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it is the accused and accused
alone who have committed the crime. Every hypothesis, except the
guilt of the accused will have to be ruled out and the case before us
deserve to be tested on these well settled principles.

It is a well accepted principle in criminal law that suspicion,
howsoever strong, cannot take place of proof beyond reasonable
doubt and it is imperative for the prosecution to establish every
circumstance in the chain of circumstances by adducing a proof
thereof. The prosecution must discharge the burden of establishing
the circumstance from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn
fully, and also the facts so established should be consistent with the
hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. The circumstances should be
of conclusive nature and they should exclude every hypothesis, but
the one proposed to be proved. In other words, it is necessary that the
circumstances must be brought before the Court in form of a chain,
so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion
consistent with the innocence of the accused, and it must be such as
to show that within all human probability the act must have been
done by the accused.

57. When we have examined the case of the prosecution, when five
accused persons faced the charge under Section 364-A, 341, 302,

Ashish
50/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

201, 120-B, 34 of IPC and under the provisions of MCOCA, as the
accused were charged for kidnapping Vipin, a 22 year old, son of
PW-9 Gulabchand in a planned manner for extorting an amount of
Rs. One crore from the father and by keeping him in confinement to
achieve this purpose.

The deceased used to commute to Nashik for attending the
classes, and on the fateful date i.e. on 8/06/2013, he was dropped to
Nashik by his uncle PW-14 by Car. He did not return home, but made
a phone call to his father informing him that he would be staying
overnight with his friend ‘Deshmukh’. Inquiries were made by the
family of the deceased to reveal that he did not attend the classes and
on 9/06/2013, a phone call was received by PW-9 from the mobile
number of his son, and an unknown person asked him to arrange an
amount of Rs. One crore for release of Vipin. A missing complaint
was lodged by the father at Panchvati Police Station, but he did not
reveal that a phone call of ransom was received. After making
inquiries that Vipin did not attend the classes, he lodged an FIR on
10/06/2016 and the offence under Section 364-A was invoked. On
13/06/2013, another phone call was received by Gulabchand from an
unkown number once again demanding the ransom and threatening
that if the amount is not paid, he will have to suffer dire
consequences.

The information about the phone call was given to the
Investigating Officer and before the investigation could progress,
Vipin’s dead body was found at Adgaon Shivar.

58. Upon identification of the body, to notice that the body was of
Vipin, and in whose regard missing complaint was lodged by

Ashish
51/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Gulabchand, his father, the investigating machinery was set into
motion and a spot panchnama was prepared. The investigating
revealed that the dead person was inflicted injuries with sharp edged
weapon and inquest of the body was conducted. PW-37, the SDPO
directed photographs of the body to be taken and a spot panchanama
was prepared and the articles found lying on the spot were seized.
The body was sent for postmortem and the postmortem report
revealed that the death was caused on account of multiple stab
injuries and multiple rupture of organs.

Both the accused persons were arrested and an injury was
found on the left hand three fingers of Chetan Pagare. Accused No.2,
Aman Jat, while in custody of police led the investigating officer to
his clothes, SD card, and gupti, whereas, from accused no.1, Chetan,
articles like knife, clothes, sac, shoe lace came to be seized. Chetan
also lead the investigating team to the place, where the deceased was
confined. The weapons which were seized and made part of the
investigation were forwarded to Dr. Anand Pawar (PW-11), who drew
diagrams with the specifications, and he gave an opinion with the
injuries of the deceased were possible by the said sharp edged
weapon. Chetan Pagare, accused no.1, who sustained injury being
referred to PW-12, was examined and it was opined that the injuries
were caused to him by a sharp weapon and the age of injuries was
also stated.

Investigation warranted an investigation into the aspect of how
the deceased Vipin was caught hold by the accused and when the
CDR of the phone of the deceased and his father were collected by
the investigating officer, it revealed the link that the deceased was

Ashish
52/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

receiving phone calls from accused Aman Jat, and even the phone
call received on 13/06/2013 by Gulabchand, was from a mobile
phone which was traced to accused no.1. The material collected from
the spot as well as the one which was seized upon drawing of
discovery panchnama, which included a memory card was forwarded
to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Kalina, and it was converted into
a CD and screenshots were drawn, and there was a comparison of the
person seen in the video footage drawn from the said memory card
with that of the deceased, and the accused and the involvement of the
accused nos.1 and 2 clearly surfaced on record.

59. On the charge-sheet being filed in the competent court, all the
accused were subjected to trial and the prosecution examined 36
witnesses to establish the charge levelled against the accused. PW-2
to PW-8 and PW-10 acted as panch witnesses, as they were signatory
to the panchnama carried out for various processes resulting into
recovery of articles from the accused persons as well as recovery of
the clothes of the deceased. Accused No.1 also acted as a panch
witness upon the panchnama being prepared of the dead body which
was identified to be of ‘Vipin Bafna’ by his father and uncle. Accused
No.2 acted as a panch for the seizure of the articles found lying on
the spot including the shoes and two pieces of towel stained with
blood, one gunny bag, as well as one wooden log with blood on one
side and one goggle. Samples were drawn with the earth mixed with
blood and all the articles were properly sealed by drawing a
panchnama.

The prosecution also relied upon the testimony of two
witnesses, which proved to be crucial being the testimony of PW-17,

Ashish
53/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

Mayur Kurhade, friend of Aman Jat, who acted on his directions and
brought the motorcycle to the flat in which Vipin was confined and
he deposed before the Court that on 12/06/2013, when he went to the
flat of Aman Jat, he referred to the presence of Chetan Pagare and
Aman Jat along with the Vipin Bafna, who was in confinement. He
specifically deposed that his hands were tied, his legs were crossed
and tied with black lace and there was a white strip affixed on his
mouth. He was threatened by the two accused persons that this
incident shall not be disclosed by him to anyone and considering the
fact that Chetan Pagare was a hardened criminal, he kept mum, but
subsequently recorded his statement and also deposed before the
Court about the scene noted by him on 12/06/2013.

Another important witness, who saw the deceased in the
company of the accused person is a rickshaw driver (PW-18), who
categorically deposed that he was asked by the two accused persons
to carry the bedding to one apartment and, they approached Nav
Akash Apartment, Building No.12, when accused no.1, Aman took
the bedding and asked deceased Vipin to bring up other and he was
told that the payment due to him shall be made subsequently. Hemant
Deokar identified the accused as he knew them by names and he also
identified the slim person to be the deceased from the photographs.

60. The prosecution also relied upon the evidence, as regards the
mobile/SIM card and PW-22, the mobile shop owner, who was
engaged in mobile repairing and dealing with sale and purchase of
secondhand mobile cell handsets, deposed that he received one
mobile phone for repairing and he used to note the I.M.E.I. number,
write the name of the owner, when he received the mobile for

Ashish
54/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

repairing. He deposed that a Nokia company model 1200 came to
him for repair and he charged Rs. 300/- for its repairing, but the
person who gave it did not come back and therefore, he sold the
mobile to one person and noted his name on a chit. The chit was
produced by him, which was seized by drawing a panchnama with
the name ‘Aman’ scribed on it, though PW-22 was not able to
identify Aman in the Court, in our view, what was the relevant
circumstance was the purchase of mobile phone by accused no.2,
Aman, from PW-22.

As per the prosecution, this mobile phone was used by Aman
when he inserted the SIM cards, which were procured by him from a
mobile phone belonging to Praful Tekade (PW-27), who lost his
mobile and which contained two SIM cards, one in the name of his
mother and other in the name of his friend Rameshwar Wad.

Prosecution also examined Rameshwar Wad (PW-28) to state
that, it was Praful Tekade, who was using his SIM card with number
9011972139. With this evidence on record, when the CDRs of the
two SIM numbers i.e. 7773989300 and 9011972139, were procured
from the service provider i.e. Vodafone Idea Limited and BSNL, the
prosecution established the connect by examining PW-34 and PW-35.

It was established that the phone calls were made from these
two numbers, which were used by Aman Jat and the phone calls were
received on the number of the deceased as well as PW-9 and who
received a ransom call. The prosecution has also established the
constant connect between number 9764585333, used by Chetan
Pagare accused no.1, and PW-25 deposed that the SIM was in his
name but he had given it to Chetan Pagare.


Ashish
                                55/71       Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

The prosecution has established that accused nos.1 and 2 were
in constant touch with each other, and this establishes the conspiracy
hatched between the two for kidnapping Vipin, demanding ransom
and when the demand is not satisfied, causing his death.

61. The aforesaid evidence, being corroborated by the version of
the Investigating Officers as well as the experts from Forensic
Department i.e. PW-26, the learned Trial Judge appreciated the
evidence and rightly reached a conclusion that it is the two accused
persons, i.e. accused nos.1 and 2, who are the responsible for
kidnapping Vipin, making phone calls for ransom by hatching a
conspiracy and thereafter, since their demand for ransom was not
made by PW-9, he was done to death and in the investigation, the
weapons which were the cause for his death were also recovered and
seized. Furthermore, in light of the other corroboration in form of
identification of the belongings of the deceased by his own father,
which were found from the spot and which were recovered from the
accused persons, lead the Trial Judge to draw an inference, but the
chain of circumstances has been conclusively established without any
gap, and it conclusively proved that it is only the two accused who
have committed the offence.

The Trial Judge, by referring to the evidence produced by the
prosecution reflecting the sequence of incident i.e. kidnapping, calls
for ransom and then murder, appreciated the evidence laid by the
prosecution, by considering the circumstance of the plan to trap the
victim, and to kidnap him and thereafter causing his death as the
demand for ransom was not satisfied. Heavy reliance is also placed
upon the discovery of Articles, including the weapons under Section

Ashish
56/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

27 as well as the electronic evidence, including the memory card
from Aman Jat (Exhibit -92) and the recovery muddemal article i.e.
the memory card (Article -15) which was proved through PW – 3 as
well as the Investigating Officer PW – 37. The said memory card was
kept hidden by the accused Aman Jat in the room at River View
Apartment and since Aman had exclusive knowledge about the said
memory card, which was subsequently forwarded for analysis, the
Trial Judge relied upon the evidence, by observing that the memory
card, which was in form of primary evidence, which resulted into the
videos and pictures being drawn therefrom and the evidence of PW –
26 was relied upon who deposed that the said evidence was not
tampered. Apart from this, the link of CDR and SDR of the mobile
phones used by the two accused persons and the phone calls made on
the mobile phone of deceased and his father was also exhaustively
dealt with by the learned Trial Judge. The Trial Judge also noted that
the SIM cards used by the accused persons were not in their name,
but the connect between the numbers used by them and the accused
was efficiently brought on record by the prosecution. The Trial Judge
specifically recorded the following conclusion in paragraph 120 :-

“120. As discussed above, prosecution has established various
circumstances i.e. since inception, designed plan to trap the victim phone-calls
for ransom, phone-calls inerlinked accused No.1 & 2 and witnesses who were
known to them and that they have deposed about last seen of the deceased Vipin
in the company of accused Chetan Pagare and accused Aman Jat. Further,
circumstances as to the discovery of incriminating articles at the instance of
accused and from the spot of incident, CA reports which further established
connection of accused No.1 & 2 with the incident. Defence of the accused No.1
& 2 is of total denial. Statements of accused recorded u/s. 313 of Cr.P.C., reflects
that they did not explain any of the circumstance, put up to them.”

The Trial Judge also recorded that the motive of committing
the offence was very clear that is to extract money by putting the

Ashish
57/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

victim and his family under pressure.

62. In the wake of the aforesaid evidence being brought on record,
the Trial Judge recorded a finding of guilt though in absence of any
material to establish the charge under the MCOCA, the accused
persons stood acquitted. We concur with the opinion expressed by
the Trial Judge in recording the finding of conviction, as regards the
two accused, and see no reason to interfere with the said finding
which is based upon proper appreciation of evidence brought on
record by the prosecution through 36 witnesses and particularly,
when the entire evidence being put to the accused nos.1 and 2,
nothing was brought on record to impact its credibility. Though the
accused persons had cross-examined the prosecution witnesses, the
testimony of the prosecution witnesses remained unshattered, and
though exhaustive arguments were made before the trial court about
the lacuna and investigation, the learned Trial Judge has rightly
observed that unless and until the lacuna pointed out, is vital and goes
to the root of the matter which would render the case of the
prosecution unbelievable, they deserve to be ignored, as they did not
materially affect the case of the prosecution. We therefore, do not
find any reason to interfere with the finding rendered by the Trial
judge in recording the guilt of the two accused persons.

63. Then, the question arises whether the imposition of death
penalty by the Trial Judge deserves confirmation and since the State
has filed the reference for confirmation of the death sentence, and in
exercise of the power conferred under Section 366 of Cr.P.C., the
sentence of death cannot be executed unless confirmed by the High
Court and while confirming the death sentence, it is imperative for us

Ashish
58/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

to appreciate whether the imposition of death sentence is justified.

While imposing the death sentence upon the two accused
persons, the trial judge has applied the test of ‘rarest of the rare
case’, and considered the mitigating circumstance, namely the age of
the accused no.1 being of 25 years, and accused no.2 of 22 years.

As against this, the Judge considered the aggravating
circumstances emerging on record to the following effect:-

(I) The offence is relating to commission of heinous crimes like
murder, kidnapping and offences against human body etc., by the
accused with a prior record, though there was no previous conviction
handed over to them in the past, but many offences were registered
against the accused for the previous 10 years.

Accused no.1 was externed and there were many complaints
against the accused about their conduct and creating terror in the
mind of general public and that they were leading life of vagrancy.

(II) The offence was committed while the offender was engaged in
the commission of another serious offence : Record reflects that
many offences were registered against the accused before the
incident. It reveals that when they were on bail, they have committed
the present offence which is very much heinous in nature. Initially
offence of kidnapping for ransom, wrongful confinement was
committed and during the course, accused committed brutal murder
of the victim.

(III) The offence was committed with the intention to create fear
psychosis in the public at large and was committed in a public place
by a weapon or device which clearly could be hazardous to the life of

Ashish
59/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

a person. Evidence indicates that the accused made phone-call on
13.06.2013 to the father of victim and threatened that “गद्दारी करतो
आहे” These words indicate that accused came to know that the father
of victim approached police. On the next day, dead-body of victim
Vipin was found. Deadly weapons like knife and sword-stick were
used by accused to inflict multiple fatal stab injuries upon victim.
This circumstance further indicate that the offence was committed
with an intention to create fear in the mind of public at large as a
consequence of non-fulfillment of the demand of ransom, so that, no-
one should dare to resist the act of accused by lodging complaint
against them.

(IV) The offence of murder was committed for ransom i.e. to
receive money or monetary benefits : Evidence on record clearly
indicates that the victim who belongs to sound financial background,
was kidnapped and there was demand of ransom for Rs. One Crore.
But when accused realized that the father of victim approached
police, they have brutally killed the victim.

V) The offence was committed outrageously for want only while
involving inhumane treatment and torture to the victim : Evidence on
record indicates that victim was confined in the room. He was kept in
a situation where his limbs were tied and mouth was gagged. Accused
persons shot a video of the victim which further point out reckless
behaviour on their part. Victim who was defenseless, was confined
like an animal, outrageously and was tortured for no fault on his part.
Mental torture and inhuman treatment through which deceased must
have gone after he was kidnapped, cannot be imagined. Manner in
which victim was killed was literally dreadful.


Ashish
                              60/71       Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

(VII) When murder is committed for a motive which evidences total
depravity and meanness: The crime was committed with only motive
to earn easy money. After kidnapping of victim, accused made phone-
call to the father of victim for demand of ransom of Rs. One Crore.
When their demand was not fulfilled, they have brutally done away
with the victim.

(VIII) When there is a coldblooded murder without provocation:

Victim was confined by the accused. Evidence indicates that his
clothes were also changed. He was initially confined in the flat and
thereafter, he was taken to an isolated place i.e. barren land where
upon one dilapidated house structure was standing. Victim was
brutally killed over there. All these circumstances clearly indicate
coldblooded & pre-planned murder committed by accused.
(IX) The crime is committed so brutally that it pricks or shocks not
only the judicial conscience but even the conscience of the society:

The manner and circumstances in which offence was committed, lead
horrifying impact on the society. During routine of normal people,
one young boy was suddenly kidnapped. Thereafter, threatening call
for ransom were received by his family members. Faith of the family
and the victim was kept hinging at the whims of accused. Thereafter
last call was received by the father of victim on 13.06.2013. At that
time, he requested accused to allow him to talk with his son but
accused disconnected the call. Next day, dead-body of Vipin was
found, lying at an isolated place. Injuries noticed on the dead-body
reflected barbaric act attributed to the accused. Victim was
defenseless, young boy of 22 years old. But then also, these two
accused, who were in complete dominating position, assaulted him

Ashish
61/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

with deadly weapons like sharp knife and sword-stick and inflicted
multiple stab injuries. Inquest panchanama gives vivid idea of the
situation of dead-body which indicate that the crime was committed
so brutally that it shock the conscience of the society.

64. Relying upon various precedents, for striking a balance
between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the trial Judge
arrived at a conclusion that the guilt of the accused under Section
364-A r/w 34 of IPC, which is proved must be considered to be of the
gravest nature, which justified stringent punishment prescribed for
the offence. Similarly, they were found guilty under Section 302 of
IPC, which contemplate punishment for death. Recording that the
accused committed murder of a 22 years young boy with whom they
had no previous enmity, nor was there any provocation on his part
instigating the accused to take his life and the fact that there were 26
fatal injuries inflicted on him with deadly weapons, an inference was
drawn that the mode and manner of commission of offence was
ruthless and vicious and was indicative of extreme pervert mentality
and also was assertion of a fact that the accused had no value for
human life.

The trial Judge also applied the well settled principle that while
imposing the punishment, the Court is required to consider as to
whether the collective conscience of the Society was shocked and it
will expect the holder of the judicial power to inflict death penalty, as
ultimately, punishment is the way in which the Society expresses its
denunciation of wrongdoing; and in order to maintain respect for the
law, it is essential that the punishment inflicted for grave crimes
should adequately reflect the revulsion felt by majority of citizen for

Ashish
62/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

them. Holding that there are about 9 aggravating circumstances,
whereas none of the mitigating circumstances are available and
though young age was projected as a mitigating circumstance, that
itself would not compete with the 9 aggravating circumstances, by
weighing all the mitigating and aggravating circumstances and
holding that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating
ones, and the criminal track record of the accused and their conduct
in jail, further fortify that there is no likelihood of their reform, as the
offence committed by them was brutal, inhuman and diabolic, the
learned Judge arrived at a conclusion that there is no reason to show
leniency in case of such heinous crime and handed over death
sentence to the accused Aman Prakash Singh Jat and Chetan
Yashwantrao Pagare on being convicted for the offence punishable
under Section 302, 364- A r/w 34 and 120-B of IPC.

65. The death penalty jurisprudence strongly embedded as one of
the punishment for heinous and grave offences is operated in India
under ‘rarest of rare’ doctrine where death sentence is imposed by
way of an exception and life imprisonment is the rule, and it is
mandated only when the rehabilitation of the offender is impossible.
Though Article 21 guarantee ‘Right to life and liberty’, it allows its
deprivation according to the ‘procedure established by law’. The
imposition of capital punishment in case of serious offences like
murder, terrorism resulting in death, gang rape, under the IPC as well
as BNS, reflect that it is a punishment, which is only available in
grave offences and while imposing death sentence, it contemplate
recording of ‘special reasons’.




Ashish
                                      63/71            Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

The Apex Court, in a Constitution Bench decision, in case of
Bachan Singh (supra), while upholding the constitutionality of death
penalty, limited it strictly, to cases where the alternative of life
imprisonment is unquestionably foreclosed.

In case of Macchi Singh & Ors vs. State of Punjab 5 the Apex
Court directed a balance-sheet of aggravating and mitigating
circumstances to be drawn to ascertain whether the case falls in
‘rarest of rare’ category and the Court was expected to draw a
balance-sheet of the two before forming an opinion as to whether the
case would fall within the rarest of rare category. For the reason that
though death penalty was recognized as a deterrent penalty, it is
expected to be resorted to only in exceptional circumstances.

The broad guidelines laid down by the two Benches of the
Apex Court setting out the guidelines or indicators of the aggravating
or mitigating circumstances, clarified that they cannot be put into
water-tight compartments that curb the discretion of any Judge to do
justice in a given individual case, and in specific words the Apex
Court in Bachan Singh (supra) clarified thus:-

“In many cases, the extremely cruel or beastly manner of the commission of
murder is itself a demonstrated index of the depraved character of the
perpetrator. That is why, it is not desirable to consider the circumstances of the
crime and the circumstances of the criminal in two separate water-tight
compartments. In a sense, to kill is to be cruel and, therefore, all murders are
cruel. But such cruelty may vary in its degree of culpability. And it it only when
the culpability assumes the proportion of extreme depravity that ‘special
reasons’ can legitimately be said to exist.”

While laying down a list of helpful factors of aggravating and
mitigating circumstances, in Bachan Singh (supra), a word of caution
was expressed to be exercised from treating them to be exhaustive as
5 (1983) 3 SCC 470

Ashish
64/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

it was clarified that they were merely indicative and the mitigating
circumstances have to be read in a ‘liberal and expansive way’
accounting for dignity of human life. Paragraph 209 of Bachan Singh
(supra) recorded thus:-

“209. There are numerous other circumstances justifying the passing of the
lighter sentence; as there are countervailing circumstances of aggravation. ‘We
cannot obviously feed into a judicial computer all such situations since they are
astrological imponderables in an imperfect and undulating society.’ Nonetheless,
it cannot be over-emphaised that the scope and concept of mitigating factors in
the area of death penalty must receive a liberal and expansive construction by
the courts in accord with the sentencing policy writ large in Section 354 (3).
Judges should never be bloodthirsty. Hanging of murderers has never been too
good for them. Facts and figures, albeit incomplete, furnished by the Union of
India, show that in the past, courts have inflicted the extreme penalty with
extreme infrequence- a fact which attests to the caution and compassion which
they have always brought to bear on the exercise of their sentencing discretion
in so grave a matter. It is, therefore, imperative to voice the concern that courts,
aided by the broad illustrative guidelines indicated by us, will discharge the
onerous function with evermore scrupulous care and humane concern, directed
along the highroad of legislative policy outlined in Section 354(3), viz, that for
persons convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence an
exception. A real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life postulates
resistance to taking a life through law’s instrumentality. That ought not to be
done save in the rarest of rare cases when the alternative option is
unquestionably foreclosed.”

66. In Macchi Singh (supra), the guidelines indicated in Bachan
Singh, were again tapered and it was expected for a Judge to ask an
answer the following two questions:-

(a) Is there something uncommon about the crime which renders
sentence of imprisonment for life inadequate and calls for a death
sentence?

(b) Are the circumstances of the crime such that there is no
alternative but to impose death sentence even after according
maximum weightage to the mitigating circumstances which speak in
favour of the offender?

Ashish
65/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

67. The above guiding principles, therefore, were laid down to the
effect that if upon taking an overall view of all the circumstances in
the light of the aforesaid proposition and taking into the account the
answers to the questions posed herein above, the circumstances of the
case are such that imposition of death sentence is warranted, the
Court would proceed to do so.

In Macchi Singh (supra), it was indicated that the categories of
cases could fall under five heads; viz the manner of commission of
murder, motive, anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime,
magnitude of the crime, and personality of the victim.

68. In a recent decision in case of Manoj vs. State of M.P6., the
Division Bench of the Apex Court, once again revisited the principle
laid down by the two Constitution Benches in Bachan Singh (supra)
and Macchi Singh (supra) and culled out the parameters as below:-

“221. In Machhi Singh, this court also attempted to categorise cases under
broadly five heads (i.e., manner of commission of murder, motive, anti-social or
socially abhorrent nature of the crime, magnitude of crime, and personality of
victim), by strongly analysing the aggravating circumstances of the crime. A
formalistic reliance on these categories however, has the potential of leading any
court awry as it has the unintended effect of drawing attention away from the
criminal, and focusing disproportionately on the crime – the dangers of this
standardisation was also noted by this Court in Swamy Shraddananda, Sangeet
and more recently in Sanjiv Khanna, J’s dissenting opinion in Manoharam v.
State.

222. This court in Bachan Singh had warned against categorising cases.
Rejecting the contention that standards and guidelines should be laid down, it
was noted in Bachan Singh that degree of culpability cannot be measured, and
aggravating and mitigating circumstances could not be rigidly enumerated so as
to exclude “all free play of discretion”. Reiterating that criminal cases cannot be
categorised as there were infinite, unpredictable and unforeseen variations, it
was held that by such categorization, the sentencing process would cease to be
judicial, and such standardisation or sentencing discretion is beyond the court’s
function. Therefore, it would be befitting if reliance were placed not solely on
those five categories of crimes (which lays undue emphasis on aggravating
circumstances) enumerated in Machhi Singh, and instead on the two question-
test, and the four guiding principles of Bachan Singh that were succinctly culled

6 (2023) 2 SCC 353

Ashish
66/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

out in Machhi Singh.

223. The decades that followed, has witnessed a line of judgments in
which this court has continually taken judicial notice of the incongruence in
application of the ‘rarest of rare’ test enunciated in Bachan Singh, and therefore,
tried to restrict imposition of the death penalty, in an attempt to strengthen a
principled application of the same.

224. This aspect was dealt with extensively in Santosh Bariyar where the court
articulated the test to be a two-step process to determine whether a case
deserves the death sentence – firstly, that the case belongs to the ‘rarest of rare’
category, and secondly, that the option of life imprisonment would simply not
suffice. For the first step, the aggravating and mitigating circumstances would
have to be identified and considered equally. For the second test, the court had
to consider whether the alternative of life imprisonment was unquestionable
foreclosed as the sentencing aim of reformation was unachievable, for which the
State must provide material.”

69. Reliance is also further placed in the decision in case of
Shankar Kisanrao Khade (supra) when the Court developed the
‘Crime test and the Criminal test’ and expounded the criterion for
‘rarest of rare case’ in emphatic words as below:-

“52. …. In my considered view, the tests that we have to apply, while awarding
death sentence are “crime test”, “criminal test” and the “R-R test” and not the
“balancing test”. To award death sentence, the “crime test” has to be fully
satisfied, that is, 100% and “criminal test” 0%, that is, no mitigating
circumstance favouring the accused. If there is any circumstance favouring the
accused, like lack of intention to commit the crime, possibility of reformation,
young age of the accused, not a menace to the society, no previous track record,
etc. the “criminal test” may favour the accused to avoid the capital punishment.
Even if both the tests are satisfied, that is, the aggravating circumstances to the
fullest extent and no mitigating circumstances favouring the accused, still we
have to apply finally the rarest of the rare case test (R-R test). R-R test depends
upon the perception of the society that is “society-centric” and not “Judge-
centric”, that is, whether the society will approve the awarding of death sentence
to certain types of crimes or not. While applying that test, the court has to look
into variety of factors like society’s abhorrence, extreme indignation and
antipathy to certain types of crimes like sexual assault and murder of
intellectually challenged minor girls, suffering from physical disability, old and
infirm women with those disabilities, etc. Examples are only illustrative and not
exhaustive. The courts award death sentence since situation demands so, due to
constitutional compulsion, reflected by the will of the people and not the will of
the Judges.”

70. In light of the aforesaid principles being culled out, it is
evidently clear that while imposing the sentence of death, the Court
would be required to take into consideration multiple circumstances,

Ashish
67/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

but what is expected is a flexible approach of considering case
specific factors relating to the Crime and the Criminal and as there is
no straight jacket formula of identification of any particular
circumstance as purely aggravating or mitigating. That being the
specific reason when in Manoj (supra), the Court expressed a serious
concern about the non-uniform application of Bachan Singh (supra)
framework, discretion in sentencing and noted that such concern need
to be dispelled as generally judges turn to precedents for comfort of
numbers, but that process will only give an indication as to how
similar instances have been dealt with and it may have a limited role
when it comes to sentencing. The discretion accorded to the Court in
sentencing was expected not to be judge-centric or resulting in
desperate rulings, but in fact, the guiding factors should arm the
Court with flexibility of considering case specific factors relating to
the crime and criminal without falling into pre-determined patterns.

71. It is in the wake of this scenario, emerging with a provision
already existing in the form of Section 235 (2) for pre-sentencing
herein, its scope was expanded by casting an obligation on the State
to provide material on the accused, who may have a poor or
rudimentary level of legal representation. Before categorizing the
circumstances emerging on conclusion of a trial into ‘Rarest of Rare
category’, certain practical guidelines for collecting the mitigating
circumstances are also laid down, with great emphasis on collection
of additional information pertaining to the accused and, at the same
time, affording an opportunity to produce evidence in rebuttal
towards establishing all mitigating circumstances. The conduct of the
accused in jail, as well as the other activities in which he was

Ashish
68/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

involved, are directed to be collected from the relevant jail authorities
to ascertain whether it will provide further evidence of reformative
progress and reveal post-conviction mental illness, if any.

72. In light of the aforesaid discussion, it becomes crystal clear
that, with the passage of time, the factors for determining ‘rarest of
rare’ category and, before categorizing an offender into this category,
the facts and circumstances of each case are to be gone into carefully.
It is imperative to find ‘special reasons’, which would be arrived at
by paying due regard to the ‘Crime and the Criminal’. What is the
relative weight to be given to the aggravating and mitigating factors
would depend upon the facts and circumstances of a particular case,
though none of these have been laid down as exhaustive factors and
ultimately, it is to be seen that, with the advancement of the capital
punishment jurisprudence in the country, and the tilt towards a
reformative approach, the imposition of death penalty itself demand
consideration with an open mind and not to be foisted by testing it on
the sole factor, as to whether it would shock the conscience of the
community.

73. Applying the aforesaid factors, when we have appreciated the
case of the prosecution as laid before the trial judge, with the
circumstances leading to the guilt of the two accused, and though we
have confirmed the finding rendered by the trial judge in the
impugned judgment, as regards their guilt being established for
committing the offence of kidnapping for ransom, and ultimately,
when the demand is not satisfied, eliminating the victim, who was
kept alive to receive ransom. We must note that the accused persons,
aged 25 and 22 years, at the time of commission of crime, were two

Ashish
69/71 Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

young persons and in an attempt to acquire wealth by foul means,
asked the deceased to be in their company, and he walked into their
trap but he was then confined with a view to solicit ransom from his
father.

The quest of two young persons to acquire wealth, and to
become wealthy and live a comfortable life cannot be described as an
exceptional desire, considering their age, they chose a simple
mechanism of abducting a boy known to them and from the video
footage recorded in the memory card as well as the deposition of the
two witnesses Mayur, the friend of Chetan, and Hemant Deokar, the
rikshaw driver, who saw them together do not talk of the victim being
under some pressure. From the transcription of the memory card, it
can be seen that the victim is talking in a very casual manner and
probably was not apprehending death for non-payment of the ransom
amount as demanded.

It is no doubt true that a young boy has been done to death by
inflicting multiple injuries, and the body was taken to an isolated
place and disposed of and this act of the accused definitely is
abhorrent but in our view that itself is not sufficient to categorize the
case in ‘rarest of rare’ category for imposition of death sentence.

The accused had some criminal cases registered against them
but as the learned Judge has noted, that they had not sustained any
conviction in those cases, and they were not even professional killers
but as noted by us above, were lured by the temptation of wealth
pursuit by receiving the ransom amount knowing very well that the
boy kidnapped by them belongs to a wealthy family.



Ashish
                                70/71          Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

While imposing the extreme penalty of death, it is imperative
to apply the proportionality test and keep in mind the rational and
objective connection between capital punishment and the purpose for
which it is prescribed. Imposition of every penalty is intended to
create a deterrent effect, but it is not every death done or murder
committed, where the sentence prescribed is death penalty, the Court
is justified in imposing death sentence.

74. The preplanned and concerted effort on the part of the two
accused in kidnapping Vipin for ransom, holding him in confinement,
making calls for ransom, and when the demand of ransom is not
satisfied, doing him to death, definitely is inhuman, cruel and ruthless
act, and the penalty imposed must prove to be a deterrent, but when
we proceed to answer the question whether it is one of the “rarest of
rare cases”, our answer is in the negative.

The accused persons definitely hatched a conspiracy for
kidnapping Vipin for fetching the amount of ransom, and when two
phone calls made to Gulabchand, PW-9, did not yield any result,
being baffled about what is to be done about the victim who was in
their confinement, they thought it appropriate to eliminate him, as, if
he was released they would have faced the charge of kidnapping and,
typical of young men, being impulsive and impetus, who wanted to
find an immediate solution without being bothered about the long-
term consequences, caused his death and, to shield themselves from
any evidence being found attempted to dispose of the body at a
desolate place, but ultimately they were nabbed, investigated, and
tried.




Ashish
                               71/71           Confirmation case 1 -23.doc

75. The case against the accused, having been established by the
prosecution, by adducing cogent and reliable evidence has been
believed by the Trial Judge, and we have already confirmed the
finding of recording of their guilt, but we are unable to subscribe to
the view that they are liable for imposition of death penalty, and we
set aside the imposition of death penalty, for committing the offences
punishable under Section 302, 364-A r/w 120-B of the IPC, we
commute the death sentence and direct that Appellant No.1 Chetan
Pagare and Appellant No.2 Aman Jat, shall undergo life
imprisonment for 30 years with no remission.

The Appeal is partly allowed by confirming the finding of
conviction against the appellants but commuting the death sentence
to life imprisonment for 30 years with no remission. The
Confirmation Case No.1 of 2023 filed by the State is therefore
dismissed, and Criminal Appeal Nos. 108 of 2023 and 116 of 2023
are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent.

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

Ashish

Source link

Welcome to Airr News

Welcome to Airr News

Forever

Recommended

1-Year

1-Month

Welcome to Airr News

Forever

Recommended

1-Year

1-Month

Welcome to Airr News

Aman Prakatsingh Jat vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 25 June, 2026

Bombay High Court