SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 704

2009(3) Supreme 374
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Bombay High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, Lokeshwar Singh Panta and P. Sathasivam, JJ.
Baban Bandu Patil — Appellant
versus
State of Maharashtra — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1312 of 2007
Decided on : 15-04-2009

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants :Sudhanshu S. Chaudhary, Naresh Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Ingredients of section 300, exception 4, IPC discussed.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 300, Exception 4 – For bringing in operation Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC it has to be established that the act was committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel without the offender having taken undue advantage and not having acted in a cruel or unusual manner. (Para 6)

        2003 (5) Supreme 223; (2004)11 SCC 381; (2007)11 SCC 218; SLP (Crl.) No.1515/2008 – Relied upon.

       Facts of the case :

        1. Krishnaji, in his FIR, alleged that on 06.07.2001 he was with his father in the thrashing floor.

        2. Partition between his father and uncle Bandu took place prior to the lodging of the report. Despite partition, the agricultural lands were standing in the name of his father Vithoba.

        3. In the evening of 06.07.2001, at about 7.00 p.m. his uncle Bandu and Accused no.2 Navnath and Accused no.1 Baban came to their thrashing floor and hurled abuses at them. A-1 assaulted his father with an axe. The stroke was given on the head of Vithoba. His uncle Bandu assaulted Krishnaji and his father with a stick. Accused No. 2 Navnath also assaulted him and his father with a stick.

        4. At about 7.15 p.m. his mother Sindhubai and one Prakash (PW 5) was also abused by Accused Nos. 1 and 2 and other co-Accused, who are acquitted by the trial Court.

        5. The trial Court found the three accused persons guilty while directing acquittal of four of the accused persons before it.

        6. The matter was carried in appeal before the High Court which confirmed the conviction of the appellant while allowing the appeal filed by the co-accused persons.

       Finding of the Court :

        Considering the background facts it would be appropriate to convict the appellant for offence punishable under Section 304 Part I IPC.

       Result : Appeal partly allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, upholding the conviction of the appellant for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’), while directing acquittal of two co-accused persons who had faced trial for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC. All the three accused persons were found guilty of the aforesaid charges by learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule.

2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

First Information Report was lodged by one Krishnaji at Dhule Police Station on 7.7.2001 at 0030 hrs. It was alleged by him in the report that on 06.07.2001 he was with his father in the thrashing floor. One Bandu Rambhau Patil is his uncle. Partition between his father and uncle Bandu took place prior to the lodging of the report. Despite partition, the agricultural lands were standing in the name of his father Vithoba. In the evening of 06.07.2001, at about 7.00 p.m. a calf which was tied in his thrashing floor, untied itself and went to the thrashing floor of his uncle Bandu. Krishnaji followed the calf to the thrashing floor of his uncle Bandu, caught hold of it and brought it back to his thrashing floor. At that time his uncle Bandu, Accused No. 1 Baban and Accused No. 2 Navnath were present. They scolded him on account of the calf entering their thrashing floor. He explained that calf had un-tied itself and that it was not a deliberate act on his part. He returned to his thrashing floor along with the calf.

After some time, his uncle Bandu and Accused no.2 Navnath and Accused no.1 Baban came to their thrashing floor and hurled abuses at them. A-1 assaulted his father with an axe. The stroke was given on the head of Vithoba. His uncle Bandu assaulted Krishnaji and his father with a stick. Accused No. 2 Navnath also assaulted him and his father with a stick. The assailants after noticing the injuries, left for their house. He along with his father Vithoba returned to his house. On the way to their house, they were also accompanied by one Prakash Bhandane - husband of his aunt.

At about 7.15 p.m. his mother Sindhubai was also abused by Accused Nos. 1 and 2 and other co-Accused, who are acquitted by the trial Court. At that time Prakash (PW 5) requested them not to scold Sindhubai. Accused no.2, Accused no.1 and other Accused persons assaulted his mother Sindhubai as well as Prakash (PW 5). At that time Accused no.1 assaulted Prakash (PW 5) with sword, at his neck. Sindhubai was also beaten by other lady accused persons by fists and blows. This beating was witnessed by Meerabai, Nadarbai, Sadashiv etc. and these witnesses have rescued Sindhubai and Prakash (PW 5). Thereafter, Krushnaji, in an auto-rickshaw went to Dhule for lodging the report and for treatment.

On 06.07.2001 PSI Hiralal (PW 11) was on duty at Dhule Taluka Police station. Krushnaji’s report was registered by Police Station Officer at Cr. No. 169 of 2001, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324, 504, 506 of IPC. Investigation was taken over by PW 11 Hiralal. He registered the offence on 07.07.2001 at 00.30 hrs. At about 1.30 a.m. on 07.07.2001, he arrested Accused Nos.1 to 6. In the morning of 07.07.2001, he drew panchanama of the scene of offence (Exhibit 80) with the assistance of PW 8 Shantilal, a panch witness. At the time of drawing spot panchanama ordinary soil as well as soil mixed with the blood was seized, kept in a packet and packet was sealed. Along with Shantilal (PW 8), one more panch witness Gopichand was present. Hiralal (PW 11), thereafter, interrogated some witnesses and recorded their statements. Thereafter, he handed over the investigation to API Deepak Gotmare (PW 12).

API Deepak (PW-12) held inquest over the dead body of Vithoba in the presence of two panchas and recorded a panchanama to that e














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top