Supreme Court of India
HARJIT SINGH BEDI & CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD
Tukaram & Others
Versus
State of Maharashtra
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.902 of 2007 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1195 of 2007 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.615 of 2011 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No.1935 of 2011)
Decided on: 24-02-2011
Facts of the case:
Trial Court convicted the appellants under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 IPC.
High Court modified the conviction to one under section 304 (I) from 302.
Finding of the Court:
Appellants liable for conviction u/s 326/149 IPC and not 304(I).
Result:
Appeal disposed of.
Judgment
1. As per the prosecution story the appellants and the complainant party constituted two different groups in an organization called the Dalit Mukti Sena. It appears that both groups had been invited to the marriage of one Anil Janjale on the 22nd May, 1995 which was performed at the Shishu Mandir near the Railway Hospital. After the marriage the deceased Prakash was returning to his home along with his friends Pradeep, Nana Mahajan (PW.2) and others at about 11.00 p.m. As they came near the Hindi Church all the accused followed them. Bhagwan Salve, since deceased, and A.6 Jagan Sonawane were armed with iron rods. Bhagwan Salve caught hold of the shirt of the deceased whereupon the other accused assaulted him and hit him by giving fist blows whereas A.5 Raju Suryawanshi who was armed with a knife dealt a blow on the left buttock and Bhagwan Salve and A.6 Jagan Sonawane hit him with iron rods on the back and stomach. The deceased who was then grievously injured was taken to the Railway Hospital where PW.10 - Dr. Gangurde examined him and admitted him into the Surgical Ward. His statement was recorded by PW.12-P.I.Panwar and a case under Sections 147, 148, 324, 504 and 506 r/w 149 of the IPC was registered.
2. On the admission of the deceased, Dr. Gangurde summoned Dr. Dhakate (PW.11) a Surgeon, who found an injury on the buttocks which was stitched up the very same evening. On the 24th, however, the patient developed signs of internal bleeding and it was decided to perform an operation. On opening the stomach it was found at that stage that the intestines had been perforated at the jejunum, the spleen too was ruptured and there was an omental tear causing bleeding from the veins and about 100 c.c. foul smelling liquid was also found in the peritonial cavity which was suctioned out. The Spleen was also removed and the bleeding areas were ligatured. On the 5th June, 1995 faecal matter was seen coming out from the stomach which led to the bursting of the abdomen and as a consequence thereof a second operation was performed on the 6th June, 1995 and it was at that stage noticed that the buttock injury was 8.5 cms. deep and that a finger inserted from the rectum could meet a finger inserted into the perforation on the buttocks. Consequent to this development the patient developed septicemia and pneumonia and died on the 9th June, 1995 at about 2.00 p.m. A case under Section 302 was registered against the accused. On the completion of the investigation they were brought to trial inter alia under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 of the IPC. The Trial Court relying on the eye witnesses account and the medical evidence convicted the accused for offences punishable under Sections 302/149 etc. of the IPC and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment. An appeal was, thereafter, taken to the High Court and the High Court, has, while confirming the conviction, modified the sentence to one under Section 304 (I) read with Section 149 of the IPC and maintained the sentences and conviction under the other provisions of the IPC. In doing so the High Court opined that there was no intention on the part of the accused to cause death and the injury that they had caused could be said to be likely to cause death. It is in this situation the matter is now before us.
3. As already indicated above, a very limited relief can be granted to the accused in this matter. We find from the reading of the medical evidence that PW.11 Dr. Dhakate at the very initial stage did not realize the gravity of the situation as he had seen only one injury on the person of the deceased which was the external injury on the buttocks as he did not even look at the possibility that some internal injuries too could have been caused considering the manner of the attack.
This comes out from the evidence of the doctors PWs.10 and 11. It is true that the Doctors have tried to cover up their indifference and negligence by deposing that the death could be attributed to the in
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.