Back
M. HIDAYATULLAH, A. N. GROVER, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM
Laxman Kalu Nikalje. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
Key Points: - The Court discussed whether the homicide falls under Section 300, and concluded it does not fit the clauses 1, 2, or 3, thereby falling under Section 299 and Section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) (!) - The judgment altered the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 IPC and reduced the sentence from life imprisonment to 7 years’ rigorous imprisonment (!) (!) (!) - The Supreme Court affirmed that powers of High Court in appeal against acquittal are same as in appeal against conviction and that it must consider all questions of fact and law, giving due regard to Sessions Judge’s reasoning and the presumption of innocence (!) (!) - The court emphasized evaluating the actual injury, intent, and whether the second part of Section 300’s third clause is satisfied, based on the evidence presented (Shantabai’s testimony, Kamlabai’s testimony, and other witnesses) (!) (!) (!) - It rejected reliance on certain hearsay and earlier statements, preferring the High Court’s appraisal on the divergent evidence (!)
Judgement
HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I. : This is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Bombay setting aside the acquittal of the appellant Laxman Kalu Nikalje and convicting him under S. 302 with a sentence of imprisonment for life. The facts of the case are as follows :
2. This Laxman was married to Shantabai (P W 3) who is the daughter of one Bhika Ganpat Nikam (P. W. 2) a Railway employee working at a Railway crossing at Gartad District Dhullia. This crossing is situated on the Dhullia - Chalisgaon Railway line. Bhika was residing in one of the quarters intended for such people near the Railway, crossing with his wife Gangubai, his sons Ramrao, Laxman and Bharat. Shantabai was married some five years before the occurrence and lived with her husband, Laxman at Ganeshpur Pimpri in Taluka Chalisgaon.
3. Some days before Nag Panchami of the year 1962 Shantabai was brought to her parent s place. She stayed with them till the 10th August 1962. Laxman wanted his wife back and arrived at Gartad to take her away to his own house. Bhika put in some excuses saying that he had no money and he could only send his daughter back after he gets his pay on the 21st or the 22nd. The excuse given b
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
