2014 Labourer Murder Case: Maharashtra Court Acquits Man, Gives Him Benefit Of Doubt

A court in Maharashtra’s Thane district on Tuesday has acquitted a 39-year-old man accused in a case of murder in 2014, giving him the benefit of doubt and observing that the prosecution failed to prove the charge against him.

The investigation officer has failed to probe the case properly, Additional Sessions Judge Amit M Shete stated in the order passed on March 11 that a copy of which was made available on Monday.

Additional Public Prosecutor Sanjay More has told the court that the accused – Hanumant Narsing Mitkar (39) and Dilip Vitthal Hadse – and victim Rajesh Bodhi Sav worked at the same construction site in Thane city and knew each other.

They resided in a labour camp of the under-construction complex.

There was a change in the victim’s behaviour after he returned from his hometown in Jharkhand’s Sahibganj district in November 2014.

Hence, his roommate decided to send him back to his native place and made preparations for the same.

The prosecution told the court that on November 13, 2014, before the victim could leave for his hometown, he was killed in the labour camp allegedly by the 2 accused after he misbehaved with the niece of one of them.

Hadse died during the pendency of the trial and the case against him was abated.

While acquitting Mitkar, the court said that the incident occurred in broad daylight, but there is no direct witness to it.

It observed that the witnesses examined are not that much relevant and do not inspire confidence.

The court said, “The prosecution as well as the witnesses have failed to prove the charge beyond all reasonable doubt.”

It noted, the investigation officer failed to perform his duty in investigating the crime properly.

The court said that, the material collected during the investigation is not at all sufficient to hold the accused guilty of the offence of murder.

The court stated, “There is absolutely no material connecting the accused with the alleged crime. In the absence of any strong and corroborative evidence, the benefit of the doubt is extended to the accused.”