Scribd
Upload
12 views

SYNOPSIS

The document summarizes a criminal case in the Hon'ble Sessions Court of Bombay regarding a murder and robbery. It details that on May 13, 2009, Krishna Rao was murdered in his home and valuables were stolen, injuring his wife and children. His wife Seemabai identified five men, including Prasad Rao and Sreenu, as being responsible. Seemabai alleged Prasad Rao paid the men to kill Krishna Rao. The police investigation found evidence linking Sreenu and the others to the crime. As a result, Prasad Rao, Sreenu, and four others were charged with murder, robbery, and other offenses. The defendants deny the charges

Uploaded by

Jennifer James
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
12 views

SYNOPSIS

The document summarizes a criminal case in the Hon'ble Sessions Court of Bombay regarding a murder and robbery. It details that on May 13, 2009, Krishna Rao was murdered in his home and valuables were stolen, injuring his wife and children. His wife Seemabai identified five men, including Prasad Rao and Sreenu, as being responsible. Seemabai alleged Prasad Rao paid the men to kill Krishna Rao. The police investigation found evidence linking Sreenu and the others to the crime. As a result, Prasad Rao, Sreenu, and four others were charged with murder, robbery, and other offenses. The defendants deny the charges

Uploaded by

Jennifer James
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

IN THE HON’BLE SESSIONS COURT OF BOMBAY

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 320/PW/ 2009

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ….


PROSECUTION

VERSUS

PRASADRAO AND ORS. …. DEFENDANT

SYNOPSIS

Sr. No. Date Particulars Page no.


1. 13.05.2009 Krishna Rao was murdered at his house at around 2am
2. 13.05.2009 Gold, money and other valuables were looted from
Krishnarao’s house, causing serious injuries to the
deceased’s wife and her two minor children.
3. 13.05.2009 Around 4 A.M. Seemabai informed the nearest Police
Station and an F.I.R was filed by Police based on
information given by Seemabai.
4. 13.05.2009 Seemabai identified Sreenu and four other men alleged
to have committed the murder and dacoity.
5. 13.05.2009 Seemabai alleged that Prasad Rao had paid Sreenu and
other four men for murdering Krishna Rao.
6. 14.05.2009 The police found some jewels and valuables at the
residence of Shreenu which purportedly belonged to
Krishnarao’s wife.
7. 14.05.2009 The weapons used for the commission of murder was
found at Shreenu’s residence
8. 15.05.2009 The forensic expert tallied the fingerprints found at the
crime scene with that of the weapons recovered.
9. 16.05.2009 After further investigation the Police came to a
conclusion that Prasadrao, Shreenu and four others
commited the crime.
10. 16.05.2009 A chargesheet against Prasad Rao, Sreenu and other
four men under sec 396 of IPC r/w sec 111 and 112 of
IPC.
11. 16.05.2009 The Defendants (accused) have denied the commission
of the offence and further the council on behalf of the
defendant states that murder preceded dacoity and
therefore the offence under sec 396 was not
committed.
12. Hence, this case is brought before this Hon’ble Court
for arguments.

Points to be urged:
1. Whether the statements and evidence given by the wife and children of Krishnarao can be
relied upon for framing the charges against the accused?
2. Whether Prasadrao's act of transferring an amount of Rs.10 lakhs to Shreenu was solicitation
to commit a murder?
3. Whether the accused is guilty of the offense under sec. 396?
4. Whether Prasad Rao is liable for an offence u/s 111 and 112?

Acts relied upon:


1. Indian Penal Code, 1860
2. Code of Criminal Procedure,1973
3. Indian Evidence Act,1872
4. Constitution of India, 1950

Authorities Cited:
Some Authorities and rulings of Hon’ble High Court in similar matters;

Dated this day of 2009

Advocate for the DEFENDANT

VAKALATNAMA

I am not a member/s of the welfare fund. Therefore, stamp of Rs.2/- is not affixed herewith.
Advocate
IN THE HON’BLE SESSIONS COURT OF BOMBAY
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. OF 2009

IN THE MATTER OF

1. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )
Through office of the Government Pleader )
Bombay Sessions Court, Mumbai 400001. )

2. SEEMABAI DESHMUKH
(WIFE OF DECEASED KRISHNARAO DESHMUKH )
AGE: 45; OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE )
ADD: 23/A DEV NIWAS, )
Y. R ROAD. JAIN NAGAR, )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE- 111045 )..PROSECUTIO
N
VERSUS

1. PRASAD RAO MAHADIK )


AGE: 50; OCCUPATION: POLITICAL LEADER )
ADD: 24/B SWASTIK NIWAS )
L.J. ROAD, SAHKAR NAGAR )

CHANRAPUR, PUNE- 412205 )

2. SREENU NARAYAN )
AGE: 42; OCCUPATION: WORKER. )
ADD: 26/A LAND BUILGING )
FLOWER ROAD. GARDEN NAGAR, )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE- 412207. )

3. SONU KUMAR )
AGE: 34; OCCUPATION: WORKER )
ADD: 236/B SEA BUILGING )
J.N ROAD. CHARN NAGAR, )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE- 412207. )

4. CHANDRU RAM )
AGE: 33; OCCUPATION: WORKER. )
ADD: 466/C AIR BUILGING )
G.G ROAD. NARYAN NAGAR, )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE- 412207. )

5. PREM NAND )
AGE:40; OCCUPATION: WORKER. )
ADD: 547/D ROSE BUILDING )
M.G. ROAD, SHIVAJI NAGAR )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE- 412207 )

6. KUMAR SHAH
AGE: 47; OCCUPATION: WORKER )
ADD:622/C KRISHNA BUILDING )
L.J. ROAD, KAMGAR NAGAR )
CHANDRAPUR, PUNE-412207 ).....DEFENDANT
To,
The Prothonotary & Senior Master,
Sessions Court,
Mumbai.
Sir,
We, the Defendant above named, Adult, Indian Inhabitant, do hereby appoint, Miss.ZAINAB
KHAN, Miss. MAYURI TALEKAR, Miss SIDDHI MASURKAR and Miss.RAKSHA
JHA, Advocates, High Court, Bombay to act, appear and plead for us and our behalf in this
matter.
In witness whereof, we have set and subscribed our respective hands to this writing at
Mumbai.
Dated this 13th day of May, 2009

Accepted:
DEFENDANT
Miss. ZAINAB KHAN
Miss. MAYURI TALEKAR
Miss. SIDDHI MASURKAR
Miss. RAKSHA JHA
Advocate for the Defendants
207, B Wing, Nanak Dham Society,
Maroli Village, Chembur (East),
Mumbai- 400071.
IN THE HON’BLE SESSIONS COURT OF
BOMBAY
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 320/PW/ 2009

STATE OF MAHARASHTRRA AND ORS


….PROSECUTION
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
….DEFENDANTS
==================================
VAKALATNAMA
==================================
DATED THIS DAY OF 2009

You might also like