Four given benefit of doubt in murder case; acquitted by HC

Giving the benefit of doubt, the Bombay High Court has acquitted four persons who had robbed two persons of their belongings near Vashi Railway Station at knife point and fatally injured one of them.
All the four were acquitted of the charges of murder (section 302 IPC), robbery or dacoity (section 397 IPC) and voluntarily causing hurt (section 394 IPC) as the court ruled that the evidence adduced by the prosecution did not link them to the crime.
Accordingly, justices V K Tahilramani and Mridula Bhatkar quashed and set aside a lower court order sentencing them to life imprisonment for murder of a person and seven years' Rigorous imprisonment separately on two more charges viz robbery and causing hurt.

The four convicts who were acquitted by the High Court were Manoj Avale, Anwar Shaikh, Anand Behra and Ajay Das.
On November 24, 2005, two friends Vijay and Vipul were returning home. At Vashi Railway Station subway, they were confronted by four persons who at knife point asked them to give their belongings. Vijay gave them Rs 3,000 and a Rs 50 note, while Vipul started running away.
Vipul was captured by them and fatally assaulted. He was taken to hospital and declared dead. The four robbers ran away. Vijay lodged an FIR, following which investigation commenced.

Prosecution examined six witnesses in the case. One was Vijay, friend of the deceased, who had witnessed the murder. The other was pancha witness in respect of shirt and knife recovered at the instance of accused Manoj.

The third witness was a lady police officer Anagha Kukeri, who had sent the seized articles for forensic analysis while the fourth was Dr Jain who had conducted post mortem of Vipul's body. The fifth witness was PI Bamble who had prepared inquest panchnama and took charge of clothes of the deceased. The sixth witness was investigating officer Dubal.
"It is pertinent to note that Vijay was the sole eye witness to the incident. However, he was not able to identify any of the four accused in this case," the judges noted.
In view of the fact that Vijay did not identify any of the four accused, the prosecution relied on the evidence of recovery of articles at the instance of the accused.