Goa Court Acquits Father-Son Duo in 2017 Murder Case Citing Investigation Flaws
In a significant ruling from Colva, South Goa, additional sessions judge Ram S Prabhu Dessai has acquitted a father–son duo accused of murder and evidence destruction in a 2017 case originating from Sanguem. The court's decision was based on substantial lapses in the investigation and a critical lack of evidence connecting the accused to the alleged crime.
Background of the Case
The case involved Ravidas Shirodkar, aged 70, and his son Jai Shirodkar, aged 39, who were charged with the murder of Ravidas' brother, Shantaram Shanu Shirodkar. The incident occurred in December 2017 at a cashew plantation located in Quinamol, South Goa. According to the prosecution, the murder was motivated by a dispute over joint property, and the accused allegedly attempted to destroy evidence by burning the victim's body.
Court's Findings on Investigation Lapses
Judge Dessai highlighted several key flaws in the investigation that led to the acquittal. Notably, the panchanama, a crucial document for evidence collection, was conducted by investigating officer PI Rajan Nigalye only in January 2018—nearly 15 days after the incident. This delay raised serious questions about the integrity of the evidence.
The judge stated, "The panchanama was conducted in an open place, and the articles were seized from an area easily accessible to the public. Therefore, a serious doubt arises regarding the attachment of the said articles and their evidentiary value." This finding undermined the prosecution's case, as the evidence could have been tampered with or contaminated due to the public accessibility and delayed collection.
Lack of Evidence and Motive
Furthermore, the court noted the absence of concrete evidence proving a motive for the murder. The deceased's wife, Sangeeta Shirodkar, testified that both parties had filed multiple complaints and counter-complaints against each other at the Sanguem police station. However, the investigating officer failed to rely on documentary evidence to establish a clear motive, weakening the prosecution's argument.
The judgment emphasized that the prosecution could not establish a direct link between the accused and the crime, leading to reasonable doubt. This acquittal underscores the importance of thorough and timely investigations in criminal cases to ensure justice is served.
