1

S.C.No.17/2018
Exh.62
DEPOSITION OF WITNESS NO.8 FOR THE PROSECUTION

I do hereby on solemn affirmation state that –

My Name is : Anilkumar T.K.,

Mob. No. 9824476884,
Age 43 Years, Occu.- P.S.I., Naroli Outpost.
R/o. Police Line, Silvassa.

Examination in chief by P.P. Adv. Miranda, for the State -

1] Since September'2017, I am attached with Naroli Outpost

as In-charge P.S.I. On 29/03/2018 I was present in the Silvassa Police
Station. At around 03:00 p.m., I received phone call from one Mayur
Chauhan of C.P.F. Security and he informed that, one of his employee
namely Mahendra Bhaskar Naik was thrown from height in a chawl
behind IPCA Company at Athal and he was sent to V.B.C.H. by
ambulance. Therefore, I went to V.B.C.H. The patient was unconscious
and shifted to I.C.U. From there, I went to the spot i.e. the building of
Chetan Rathod at Athal. There I found blood spread over cement
concrete in front of shop which is nearest to the building of Chetan
Rathod. There I came to know that patient Mahendra Bhaskar Naik was
living in the room no.35 on second floor. I went to the room and saw
that, there were blood stain and number of broken bottles in the room,
therefore, I kept guard in the room. Thereafter, I conducted preliminary
inquiry and came to know from the witnesses that, victim was drinking
alcohol in the room alongwith a patient Shashi Ranjan Singh and the
said Shashi Ranjan thrown victim Mahendra Naik from second floor.
By the time, I received a call that the patient died in the hospital. I went
to the hospital and found that the dead body was shifted to the P.M.
Room. From there I came to know that, there is no relative of victim
and only security guard of C.P.F. were present in the hospital.
Therefore, at about 08:30 p.m., one Kuldeepsingh Mansingh Rajput
 2
(PW-3), who is Area Manager of the C.P.F. came to Police station and
lodged the report. The report is at Exh.23. The offence was registered
by P.S.O. Head Constable G.N. Raut vide F.I.R. No.91/2018 u/sec.302
of I.P.C. When the report was lodged by the informant, at that time, I
was present in the Police station. The investigation was handed over to
me alongwith covering letter dated 29/03/2018. The letter now shown
to me is the same. It bears the signature of P.S.O. I know the signature
of P.S.O. Raut. It is marked as Exh.63. I received copy of F.I.R.
2] On 30/03/2018, I had been to the crime scene and the
panchnama of scene of offence was drawn in presence of panchas. The
spot panchnama is admitted by the defense. It is at Exh.9. Total 9
articles were seized including 7 from the room and 2 from the spot
where body fall down. The photographs were also snapped. The seized
muddemal was deposited with muddemal clerk with muddemal receipt.
Now muddemal receipts shown to me are the same. It bears my
signature. It is marked as Exh.64. Thereafter, inquest panchnama of
the dead body was conducted in presence of panchas in the P.M. Room.
The inquest panchnama is at Exh.10. The cloths of deceased were seized
under panchnama. The photographs were snapped. Request for
conducting panchnama was made by me to the Medical officer with
request to preserve necessary samples. The carbon copy of letter now
shown to me is the same. It is marked as Exh.65. The provisional cause
of death was collected. It is marked as Exh.12-A. Post-Mortem report is
at Exh.12. The blood sample of the victim was handed over to me with
covering letter. I have recorded statements of 6 witnesses including
PW-1 and it was revealed that, victim was thrown from second floor by
one Shashi Ranjan Singh and ran away with blood stained clothes. I
have recorded the statement of PW-1 Banwarilal Moyal as per his say
including the portion mark 'A' and 'B'. The portion mark 'A' and 'B' are
collectively marked as Exh.66. The clothes of deceased were deposited
 3
with the Muddemal Clerk with Muddemal receipt now shown to me is
the same which bears my signature. It is marked as Exh.67.
3] On 30/03/2018, I have arrested the accused in presence of
panchas. Arrest memorandum of the accused now shown to me is the
same. It is at Exh.68. The personal search panchnama of the accused
was drawn in presence of panchas. It is at Exh.11. It is admitted by the
defense. The blood stained clothes of the accused which were on his
person, were seized under panchnama at Exh.11. The muddemal receipt
prepared now shown to me is the same. It is marked as Exh.69. On
31/03/2018, I have recorded statements of 3 witnesses including PW-2.
The dead body was handed over to the brother of deceased by name
Suman Bhaskar Naik. The acknowledgment receipt now shown to me is
the same. It is marked as Exh.70. On 02/04/2018, I gave request letter
to Hon'ble C.J.M. for recording statements of 3 witnesses and as per
direction, the witnesses were produced on 03/04/2018 and their
statements u/sec.164 of Cr.P.C. were recorded.
4] On 03/04/2018, the accused shown his voluntearness to
make statement in respect of the crime. Accordingly, I called two
panchas at Silvassa Police Station. In their presence, the accused made
statement that he is ready to show two mobiles of deceased, which he
had concealed. His statement was recorded in presence of panchas. It is
at Exh.32/A. Accordingly, as per direction of accused, we had been to
the house of accused in room no.109, Sai Villa Complex i.e. the building
of Dahyabhai Jeevanbhai Chauhan at Athal and from there accused
produced two mobile kept in Rice Bag. The recovery panchnama was
drawn in presence of panchnama. It is at Exh.32/B. It bears the
signature of panchas and accused. The seized muddemal was deposited
with the Muddemal Clerk alongwith the receipt now shown to me is the
same. It is marked as Exh.71.
5] On 26/04/2018 I sent all the sample collected from scene
of offence, clothes of victim and accused and blood samples handed
 4
over by the Medical Officer to F.S.L., Surat. The letter now shown to me
is the same. It bears my signature and signature of S.D.P.O. Its contents
are true and correct. It is marked as Exh.72. The acknowledgment
about receipt of muddemal was collected. It is at Exh.73. On
21/06/2018, I gave a request letter to S.D.P.O. for obtaining the CDR
record of mobile number of victim bearing number 7383439543 and
8780993181. I received CDR and CAF on 23/06/2018 and it was
revealed that both the numbers are in the name of deceased and IMEI
of mobile matched with the IMEI number recorded in the panchnama.
The CDR is at Exh.46 and Exh.53. On 25/06/2018, I have sent a letter
to Airtel Company for providing CDR alognwith Certificate u/sec.65-B
of Evidence Act. On the same day, I have submitted the chargesheet in
the Court alognwith the two mobiles. I can identify the mobiles. The
two mobiles Article-C and D now shown to me are the same. I can
identify the accused, if shown to me. On 02/03/2019, I received F.S.L.
Report alognwith muddemal and accordingly I submitted it in the
Court. Now F.S.L. Report bearing number 425 alongwith Biology report
and Serology report shown to me are the same. They are alongwith the
translated copy and are marked as Exh.74 and Exh.75. The covering
letter is marked as Exh.76. After receiving the muddemal, I have
deposited it with the Court with letter which is at Exh.18. I can identify
the seized muddemal now shown to me is the same.
6] During investigation it was revealed that, accused and
victim were drinking alcohol in the room of the victim bearing room
no.35 and while drinking, victim abused accused, therefore, accused,
being enraged, assaulted the victim by the alcohol bottle and thrown
him from the second floor.

[Today, the accused could not be produced on V.C. Hence his

identification is deferred. So also, the Ld. Counsel Adv. H.D. Parmar,
 5
for the defense requested for adjournment for cross examination,
hence, the matter adjourned till next date.]

Date : 08/06/2020. (Ms. U.M. Nandeshwar)

Silvassa. Sessions Judge,
D.&N.H., Silvassa.

[The accused is produced on V.C. from Daman Jail. Ld. P.P.

Mr. Orlando Miranda, on V.C.]

Further examination in chief on S.A. by Ld. P.P.

Adv. Miranda, for U.T.-

7] I can identify the accused if shown to me. The

accused present on V.C. from Daman Jail is the same
accused.

Cross examination by Adv. S.M. Parmar, for accused

8] Since 2001 to 2010, I was in Police Department as

a Constable. Thereafter, in 2010, I directly recruited as a
Police Sub Inspector as a fresh recruitment. I worked at
Daman and Silvassa. In 2010-2011, I undergone the training
at Gujarat Police Academy, Gandhinagar. It is correct to say
that, in the training the importance of Forensic Evidence
and how to collect the Forensic Evidence was part of our
training. It is correct to say that, Dadra and Nagar Haveli
has corroboration with the Gujarat Forensic Science
Laboratory. It is correct to say that, while investigating if
the requirement of collection of sample from forensic
laboratory, then we used to take help from Gujarat F.S.L.,
Valsad. It is correct to say that, whenever need arise, the
 6
Expert from Forensic team were called expeditiously. It is
not correct to say that, the mobile van from the F.S.L.
Valsad used to reach the spot and collect the evidence. I say
that, the Investigating Officer himself collect the required
evidence and send for analysis. Other than finger prints,
other samples are collected by the I.O. It is correct to say
that, to search and collection of finger prints is to be done
by the Forensic Team Expert. It is not correct to say that,
the Investigating officer cannot determine whether there are
finger prints of suspect on the crime scene. It is not correct
to say that, normally finger prints are not detected by the
necked eyes.

9] Naroli Outpost has no provision of registration of

F.I.R. The crimes are registered at Silvassa Police Station.
In the year 2018, no occurrence book used to be maintained
in the Police Outpost for taking the entry of any information
received regarding crime. Since the year 2016-2017, CCTNS
system is adopted i.e. Crime Criminal Tracking Network
System. Naroli outpost is not connected with the CCTNS.
There is no alternative in respect of occurrence report.
F.I.R. is not equivalent with the occurrence report. On
29/03/2018, the practice of maintaining the movement
register in the outpost was there. At that particular time, I
was on duty for 24 hours. It is correct to say that, whenever
any Police personal attended or finished his duty at Naroli
outpost, the entry is to be taken in the movement register.
On 29/03/2018 I reached Naroli outpost at about 09:00
a.m. and was present till afternoon. My resuming duty on
that day is recorded in movement register. I myself took
that entry and signed by me. I do not remember that while
 7
leaving the Police Station, I had taken the entry in
movement register or not. I can produce the movement
register dated 29/03/2018.

10] It is correct to say that, the information received

by me on phone from one Mayur Chauhan of CPF Security at
03:00 p.m. was in respect of cognizable offence. I had
informed about the said message to SHO P.I. Mr. K.B.
Mahajan, Silvassa. I did not request SHO to take station
diary entry about said message. At that particular time, I
did not feel it being a requirement to record the statement
of said Mayur Chauhan who gave the information to me on
mobile. It is correct to say that, during entire investigation I
have not recorded statement of said Mayur Chauhan. It is
correct to say that, Mayur Chauhan is the first person who
informed me about the commission of alleged crime. I have
not taken the entry about going to VBCH in the movement
register of Naroli outpost. I do not know whether the entry
is taken at Silvassa Police Station or not. I reached to VBCH
within 15 minutes, however I do not remember the exact
time. When I had been to VBCH, at that time, I inquired
with the Medical Officer about condition of the patient.
There were no relative or friend of the patient present at the
VBCH. However, his colleagues were present there. At that
time, I inquired with the Medical Officer about the nature of
the injuries sustained by the victim. The Medical Officer
informed me that the patient sustained injury on the head.
It is correct to say that, at that particular time, I was not the
investigating officer of the case. I say that, by that time, no
F.I.R. was registered. I inquired with the colleagues of the
patient / victim. Informant Kuldeep and one more security
 8
person was there. I had not taken any entry in any register
about inquiry with the informant Kuldeep and another
colleague of the victim in the hospital. I inquired with the
Kuldeep as to what happened and he informed me that one
person Mahendra Bhaskar Naik was thrown from the
building of Chetan Rathod at Athal by one person Shashi
Ranjan. I had not kept any record of said conversation with
Kuldeep. I inquired with the Kuldeep whether he witnessed
the incident and he stated that he was not present at the
time of incident. I inquired with him who else witnessed the
incident and Kuldeep stated that, nearby persons of the
building where incident took place, were present. At that
time I felt it necessary to record the statement of Kuldeep.
At that time, I informed about the information received
from the Kuldeep to SHO, Silvassa. I did not requested SHO
to take station diary entry of said information. I do not have
any written evidence about forwarding the information to
SHO, Silvassa Police Station. It was not my duty to request
the SHO to take the station diary entry of said information.
There is an entry in the movement register about my going
to spot from VBCH. I informed my Junior Officer to take
entry in movement register. On that day, A.S.I. R.D. Rohit
and P.C. H.L. Chauhan were my subordinates and many
other including PSI Pradeep Rajgar and H.C. J.P. Janathiya.
I asked P.C. H.L. Chauhan to take entry. I also asked that
staff to come on the spot.

11] On 29/03/2018 between 03:45 to 04:00 p.m., I

reached on the spot. By that time and prior to I reach on the
spot, my 3 staff members reached there.
 9
[Further cross examination is deferred till next date as the
Court time is over.]

Date : 01/07/2020. (Ms. U.M. Nandeshwar)

Silvassa. Sessions Judge,
D.&N.H., Silvassa.

[Note :- Ld. P.P. Adv. Miranda, Ld. Adv. Parmar, for accused and
accused in Jail on V.C.]

Further cross examination resumed on S.A. by Ld. Adv. Mr.

S.M. Parmar, for accused on V.C. -

12] When I reached on the spot in between 03:45 to

04:00 p.m., at that time, around 15-20 persons were
gathered there. I inquired with one Jitendra, Banwarilal and
Ajay. All three witnesses told me that, Mahendra is residing
in room no.35. I have recorded the statements of all the
three witnesses but not on the same day when I visited the
spot. I have not noted down whatever I have observed on the
spot i.e. the crime scene and where the body was fallen.
 10
[Note :- As there is some disturbance, therefore, Ld. Adv.
Parmar, for accused, seek permission to attend the Court in
person for further cross examination.]

Date : 29/07/2020. (Ms. U.M. Nandeshwar)

Silvassa. Sessions Judge,
D.&N.H., Silvassa.

[Note :- Ld. P.P. Adv. Miranda and accused in Jail on V.C.]

Further cross examination resumed on S.A. by Ld. Adv. Mr.

S.M. Parmar, for accused -

13] I say that, I kept a Guard in the premises of the

crime scene and not in the room. Today I do not remember
the name of the said Police personal who was kept to Guard
premises. I had recorded his name in the Moment Register.
Today I had not brought the Moment Register. I had not
sealed the room no.35 on second floor, however I had only
latched the door. It is correct to say that, room no.35 is at
extreme edge on the second floor. It is correct to say that,
there is a gallery / passage of around 5' Wide. There is
concrete wall to the passage. The approximate length
between room no.35 to the downward staircase is about 80'-
85'. It is not correct to say that, the height of the concrete
wall of the gallery is 3'. I say that, it is around 4' as I
measured it, but it is not in the spot panchanma (Exh.9). I
do not remember whether all 7 rooms on the first and
second floor were occupied. I have not recorded the
statements of any of the person who are resident of rooms
situated at first floor or second floor.

[The Ld. P.P. raised objection that the spot panchnama

(Exh.9), inquest report (Exh.10) and seizure panchnama of
 11
cloth of accused (Exh.11) are admitted documents and no
cross be conducted in that respect. The objection will be
considered at the stage of final argument.]

14] I had not kept any record of the preliminary

inquiry. By that time, the F.I.R. was not registered,
therefore, I had not kept any record. On 29/03/2018, I did
not enter in the room no.35, therefore, I cannot state the
exact number of broken bottles. It is correct to say that, that
was 180 ml. liquor bottle. I received call about the
admission of the patient from P.S.O. Of Silvassa Police
Station. It is correct to say that, there is station diary entry
bearing no.26/2018 registered with Silvassa Police Station
on 29/03/2018 at 15:58 p.m. by Dr. Vijay Gond about
information that, Mahendra Naik fallen from height and
admitted in I.C.U. Entry No. 26/2018 now referred to me is
correct. It is marked as Exh.79 as referred in the cross
examination. It is correct to say that, the further inquiry of
the said station diary entry was entrusted to A.S.I. R.D.
Rohit, Naroli Outpost. [The attention of witness is drawn
towards the station diary entry no.30/2018 dated
29/03/2018 at 17:15 p.m.] It is correct to say that, the said
entry is in respect of receiving information from Dr. Vijay
Gond about falling of patient from height and died during
treatment around 04:10 p.m. The entry no.30/2018 is
marked as Exh.80 as referred in cross examination. It is
correct to say that, the inquiry of said entry was also
entrusted to A.S.I. R.D. Rohit. It is correct to say that, A.S.I.
R.D. Rohit was present with me on the crime scene when I
visited the spot. A.S.I. R.D. Rohit did not record any
panchanma or recorded any witness in my presence. A.S.I.
R.D. Rohit is my sub-ordinate. I did not obtained any
 12
explanation from A.S.I. Rohit about further inquiry of entry
no.26/2018 and 30/2018. It is correct to say that, the
preliminary inquiry conducted by me is pursuant to the
entry no.26/2018 and 30/2018. I say that, the F.I.R. was
about to be recorded therefore I did not recorded anything
about preliminary inquiry. It is not correct to say that,
A.S.I. Rohit did not handed over any report to me pursuant
to the inquiry of entry no.26/2018 and 30/2018. I say that,
A.S.I. Rohit handed over Exh.79 and 80 to me and no other
report was submitted to me. The said entries were handed
over to me immediately after registration of F.I.R. It is not
correct to say that, on 29/03/2018 around 04:00 p.m., none
of the witness stated that, victim was drinking alcohol in the
room alongwith accused Shashi Ranjan Singh and said
Shashi Ranjan thrown victim Mahendra Naik from Second
floor.

15] It is correct to say that, FIR (Exh.23) was

recorded at 23:32 on 29/03/2018. It is correct to say that, I
was present during the entire period since informant had
been to the Police station at 08:30 p.m. and recording of
FIR at 11:32 p.m. It is correct to say that, before registration
of FIR, I had information that who is victim, who is accused
and who are the witnesses. It is not correct to say that,
before registration of FIR, I summoned all three witnesses
in the Police station. It is not correct to say that, I had also
summoned the mother of the accused prior to registration of
the FIR. I cannot say whether PW-2 Nitin Jadhav was lying
when he said that on 29/03/2018 he had came to the Police
Station at 08:00 to 08:30 p.m. and Police brought him to
the Police station. I had not summoned PW-2 Nitin Jadhav
 13
or Purushottam and Sushil to attend Police Station on
29/03/2018 at 08:00 p.m. I do not have any enmity with
PW-2 Nitin Jadhav. It is not correct to say that, on
29/03/2018 after 08:30 p.m., I put all the three persons i.e.
PW-2 Nitin Jadhav, Purushottam and Sushil in the lock up
to pressurize them to give statement according to my say. I
cannot state as to how many persons were in the lock up of
the Silvassa Police Station in the night of 29/03/2018. P.I.
K.B. Mahajan was S.H.O. and In-charge of Silvassa Police
Station on 29/03/2018. He was present in the Police Station
but for how much time that I cannot not state. In Police
Station, S.H.O. used to assign the investigation of the crime
registered. As per rank, P.S.O. is sub-ordinate to P.S.I. In
Silvassa, P.S.O. is of the rank of Head constable or A.S.I.
[Note :- Further cross examination is deferred as Court
Time is over.]

Date : 29/07/2020. (Ms. U.M. Nandeshwar)

Silvassa. Sessions Judge,
D.&N.H., Silvassa.

Further cross examination resumed on S.A. by Ld. Adv.

Parmar, for accused -

16] Today I have not brought the movement register

maintained with the Naroli outpost of relevant date dated 29/03/2018.
It is correct to say that, the movement register is required to be
maintained in every Police Station / Outpost as per Police Manual.

Que. On 29/03/2018, in whose custody the movement register was ?

Ans. I cannot state name of any particular person. Every concern
person used to take entry in the register.

17] In Naroli outpost every person in the Police Station is

responsible to maintain and have custody of the movement register.
 14
Que. Whether any entry sent for Silvassa Police Station to Naroli
outpost, then its entry used to be take down in the movement register ?
Ans. No.

Que. In which register, such entry is used to be taken ?

Ans. No entry is taken in any register. Only acknowledgment of such
entry is to be noted.

18] I cannot state the period of maintenance of the movement

register with Naroli Outpost. It is not correct to say that, I have not
taken any entry in the movement register of Naroli Outpost on
29/03/2018. It is not correct to say that, as no such entry was taken,
therefore, I am deliberately not producing the movement register in the
Court.

19] I had no deliberation or talk with Kuldeepsingh Rajput

(PW-3) when he had been to the Police Station to lodge the Report. On
29/03/2018, since 08:30 p.m. to 11:32 p.m., I was present in the
chamber of S.H.O. and discussing the cases including the present with
S.H.O. I may be with the P.S.O. when he was recording the F.I.R. for the
duration of one or two minutes. I cannot state the precise time for
recording of two pages F.I.R. as it depends upon the narration by the
informant. It is not correct to say that, the entire F.I.R. (Exh.20) was
dictated by me to the P.S.O. It is not correct to say that, the accused was
arrested on 29/03/2018 by me at 05:00 p.m. It is not correct to say
that, I had also summoned mother of accused to the Police Station. It is
not correct to say that, I had kept Nitin Jadhav (PW-2), Purushottam
and Sushil in illegal detention since 29/03/2018 to 03/04/2018. It is
not correct to say that, on 29/03/2018, when I visited the crime scene,
at that time, I seized two mobiles from the room of the victim. It is not
correct to say that, as I have every information with me before the
registration of crime, therefore, I lead investigation as per my choice. I
had not taken any entry in the station diary or other register of Naroli
outpost in respect of handing over of investigation of Cr.No.91/2018 to
 15
me. It is not correct to say that, as no evidence forth-came, therefore, I
have fabricated the statement and evidence of Nitin Jadhav (PW-2),
Purushottam and Sushil. It is not correct to say that, to implicate the
accused falsely, I have fabricated the panchnama under section 27 of
Evidence Act at Exh.32.

20] Today I have brought the case diary. After going through
the case diary, I say that on 03/04/2018, two mobiles of victim were
recovered at the instance of accused from the room of accused. So also,
on that day, three witnesses were produced before the Ld. Magistrate
for recording their statement u/sec.164 of Cr.P.C. The panchnama
u/sec.27 of Evidence Act commenced at about 12:35 hours i.e. the first
part. The distance between Silvassa Police Station and the room of
accused is about 03 kms.

21] Accused understand Gujarati. I do not know whether he

can read and write Gujarati or not. While drawing panchnama u/sec.27
of Evidence Act, the conversation with the accused was in Hindi and he
was answering in Hindi.
Que. Can you state the exact word of accused while giving statement ?
Ans. Accused stated that, he is willing to show two mobiles which he
had taken from the room of deceased Mahendra Bhaskar Naik before
panchas.

22] It is not correct to say that, in Exh.32/A, there is no specific

wording that accused is making the statement voluntarily. It is correct
to say that, in the contents of Exh.32/A, there is no comma (,) or
inverted comma (''). It is correct to say that, in Exh.32/A, the word
'voluntary' is also not written in Gujarati as 'rajikhushi'.

23] The panchas for panchnama at Exh.32/A were called

through Police person at around 12:30 hours. It is correct to say that,
the address of panch no.1 (PW-5) is Borigam, Gujarat.
 16
Que. What is the reason for calling the panchas from Gujarat ?
Ans. The panch no.1 Shaileshbhai (PW-5) is working at Silvassa and
having Transport business.

I do not know his permanent address at Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

I know panch no.1 Shaileshbhai (PW-5) and panch no.2 Laxman since
last three years. It is not correct to say that, panch no.2 Laxman
Chaudhary do not know Gujarati. It is not correct to say that, as PW-5
had no permanent place of work at Dadra and Nagar Haveli, therefore,
he has not given his address of Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

24] It is not correct to say that, Exh.32/A and 32/B are

prepared by sitting in the Police Station and obtained signature of
panchas on prepared statement and panchnama. It is not correct to say
that, on 03/04/2018, no recovery was made from the room of accused.

25] It is not correct to say that, all three witnesses

Purushottam, Nitin Jadhav (PW-2) and Sushil were brought together
from Police Station in Police vehicle to the Court for recording their
statements u/sec.164 of Cr.P.C. I had informed the said witnesses on
mobile to attend the Court for recording their statements. It would
wrong to say that, PW-2 Nitin was called in the Police station and from
there, he alongwith other two witnesses were brought together in the
Police vehicle for recording of their statements in the Court. It is correct
to say that, when all said three witnesses reached to the Court, at that
time, I was present in the Court premises. It is correct to say that, I took
them to the Court room. It is not correct to say that, I instructed all
three witnesses as to what statement they have to make before the
Court. It is not correct to say that, I released all said three witnesses
from my illegal custody only after they gave statements before the Court
as per my dictate.
 17
26] The blood sample of the victim were collected through the
Medical Officer on 30/03/2018. I have not collected the blood sample
of the accused. The clothes of accused were seized on 30/03/2018 and
the clothes were sent for Chemical analysis to FSL on 26/04/2018.

Que. Can you explain the reason for delay of 26 days in sending the
seized clothes for chemical analysis ?
Ans. There is no delay.

27] I cannot say whether blood group 'O' is commonly found. It

is not correct to say that, I have implicated the accused by fabricating
false evidence and by pressurizing the witnesses. It is not correct to say
that, the accused is innocent and have nothing to do with the alleged
incident. It is not correct to say that, it was a case of accident death. It is
not correct to say that, as I could not found the actual culprit if any,
therefore, the accused was falsely implicated.

No Re-examination. R.O.A.C.

Date : 19/08/2020. (Ms. U.M. Nandeshwar)

Silvassa. Sessions Judge,
D.&N.H., Silvassa.