Acquittal in Murder Case: Supreme Court Grants Benefit of Doubt to Pavan Vasudeo Sharma

The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark judgment, acquitted Pavan Vasudeo Sharma in a criminal case involving the murder of Bhima Waghmare. The case revolved around circumstantial evidence, the alleged use of a stolen service weapon, and inconsistencies in the prosecution’s claims. The ruling reaffirms the principles of criminal jurisprudence that a conviction must be based on clear, unambiguous, and conclusive evidence.

Background of the Case

The case stemmed from an incident that took place on December 20, 2005, when Police Naik Nagare was reportedly robbed of his service pistol and walkie-talkie by three unidentified persons. This robbery was recorded in an FIR, but no accused were named. The events took a tragic turn when, on January 4, 2006, an injured person was found near a motorcycle on the Mumbai-Pune highway. The victim was later identified as Bhima Waghmare, who succumbed to a gunshot wound inflicted by a firearm.

Post-mortem reports confirmed the nature of the injuries sustained by Waghmare, and forensic analysis established that the bullet retrieved from his body matched the service weapon stolen from PW11 Police Naik Nagare. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the alleged recovery of this weapon from the accused, mobile phone records linking the accused to the crime, and an extra-judicial confession.

Investigation and Trial

Following the discovery of Waghmare’s body, an investigation was launched, and forensic analysis played a crucial role in connecting various elements of the case. The key findings included:

The stolen service weapon was allegedly used in Waghmare’s murder.
The accused, Pavan Vasudeo Sharma, was later found in possession of a 9 mm pistol matching the one used in the murder.
Two mobile phones belonging to the deceased were allegedly stolen, one of which was later used in a separate kidnapping case.
The ransom calls made in the kidnapping case were traced to the stolen mobile phone.

The accused, along with others, was arrested during a police raid in Pune, where a kidnapped boy, Akash Lokhande, was being held. The prosecution argued that the evidence pointed towards the direct involvement of Sharma in both the murder and the kidnapping. The trial court convicted him based on these circumstantial links and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The defense contended that the prosecution’s case rested purely on circumstantial evidence, which failed to conclusively prove guilt. The key arguments presented by the petitioner included:

There was no direct eyewitness testimony linking Sharma to the murder.
The prosecution did not conduct a Test Identification Parade (TIP) to confirm the identity of the accused.
The mobile phone records failed to conclusively establish that the accused was in possession of the stolen phone.
The alleged extra-judicial confession was made casually during ransom calls and lacked credibility.

The petitioner further argued that the prosecution had failed to bridge the missing links in the chain of circumstantial evidence, leaving room for doubt.

Respondent’s Arguments

The State of Maharashtra, representing the prosecution, asserted that the evidence against Sharma was overwhelming. The primary points raised by the prosecution included:

The forensic analysis conclusively matched the bullet recovered from the deceased to the stolen service weapon found in Sharma’s possession.
The ransom calls were traced to the mobile phone stolen from Waghmare.
The accused was found in the same location where the kidnapped boy was confined, establishing a connection between the two crimes.

The prosecution maintained that these circumstances, taken together, proved the accused’s involvement in the crime beyond reasonable doubt.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court carefully scrutinized the circumstantial evidence and found significant gaps in the prosecution’s case. The key observations made by the court included:

No Test Identification Parade was conducted to establish that Sharma was one of the persons who robbed the police officer of his service weapon.
The mobile phone records were inconsistent, as the number in question was registered under a different name, and no evidence was provided to show that it had been handed over to Waghmare.
The alleged confession made during the ransom calls was not explicitly linked to the murder.

Referring to established precedents on circumstantial evidence, the court cited:

“The circumstances relied upon must rule out every single hypothesis except the guilt of the person accused of an offence. There are too many missing links in the present matter, and in our considered view, the material on record does not exclude every single hypothesis except the guilt of the man.”

The court also reiterated the principles laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain leading only to the guilt of the accused.

Final Judgment

In light of these findings, the Supreme Court granted Sharma the benefit of doubt and acquitted him of all charges. The ruling stated:

“We, therefore, give benefit of doubt to the Appellant. This appeal is allowed, and the Appellant is acquitted of the charges leveled against him. He be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection with any other offence.”

The judgment reinforces the fundamental principle that an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It serves as a reminder that courts must exercise caution in cases based purely on circumstantial evidence, ensuring that every link in the chain is established beyond ambiguity.

Petitioner Name: Pavan Vasudeo Sharma.
Respondent Name: State of Maharashtra through Secretary.
Judgment By: Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Justice Indu Malhotra.
Place Of Incident: Mumbai-Pune Highway.
Judgment Date: 25-03-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Pavan Vasudeo Sharma vs State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 25-03-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in Judgment by Uday Umesh Lalit
See all petitions in Judgment by Indu Malhotra
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category