Back
2010 Supreme(Bom) 706
In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.B. DESHMUKH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE
The State of Maharashtra
Versus
Govind Mhatarba Shinde
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 437 OF 2008
Decided on : 07-05-2010
For the Appellant: B.J. Sonawane, APP.
For the Respondent:M.A. Tandale. Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle that an act is not criminal unless the mind too is criminal, and the burden of proof is always on the prosecution in criminal cases involving the plea of insanity.
Headnote:
Acquittal - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - General Clauses Act, 1897, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - [S. 302, S. 3 (38) of General Clauses Act, S. 2 (n) of Cr.P.C.] - The court discussed the legal framework of the Indian Penal Code, General Clauses Act, and Criminal Procedure Code in the context of the plea of insanity raised by the accused. The court emphasized the definition of 'offence' under the General Clauses Act and the Cr.P.C., and the principle that an act is not criminal unless the mind too is criminal. The court also analyzed the legal provisions related to insanity under section 84 of the IPC and the burden of proof in criminal cases.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was acquitted of the offence under section 302 of IPC based on the plea of insanity. The prosecution's case was based on the accused's alleged assault on his mother, leading to her death. The accused claimed to be suffering from mental disorder and pleaded not guilty.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court considered the evidence, including witness statements and medical reports, and concluded that the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The court upheld the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court.
Issues: The key issues included the plea of insanity raised by the accused, the burden of proof in criminal cases, and the adequacy of evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle that an act is not criminal unless the mind too is criminal, and the burden of proof is always on the prosecution in criminal cases. The court also highlighted the importance of medical examination in cases involving the plea of insanity.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal filed by the State was dismissed, and the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court for the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC was upheld.
Deshmukh, J.
1. The judgment and order of acquittal of the respondent (accused) under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC") by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner, District Ahmednagar, dated 22nd February, 2008 in Sessions Case No.35 of 2007 is the subject matter of present appeal, filed by the appellant - State.
2. The factual matrix of the prosecution case are;
(A) According to complainant Navnath he resides in the farm house in Gat No.238 of village Vadgaon Landga. His father (accused) suffers from mental disorder since 1996. He was treated therefor. However, accused used to quarrel with his mother (wife of accused) whenever there used to be a mental tension to him. Further according to him, on 12th May, 2007 his elder brother Macchindra had been to village Palaskhed to see the ailing niece. On 13th May, 2007 complainant, along with his wife and daughter had been to the house of maternal uncle at village Hivargaon. At about 8.30 p.m. on the said day, he received a phone call from his friend Ramdas Landge informing that his father had assaulted his mother. Accordingly, complainant and his maternal uncle reached his home in village Vadgaon Landga. On reaching the home, they were informed that his uncle Devidas and others have carried injured mother to hospital.
(B) The complainant immediately rushed to the hospital, where he came to know that his mother is no more alive and that his father had assaulted his mother with wooden thrashing rod on her head.
(C) On coming back to home, he opened the house and noticed that there was blood in the room so also blood stained thrashing rod was also lying in the room.
(D) After post-mortem, funeral was performed.
(E) On 14th May, 2007, complainant Navnath lodged a report with Police Station Sangamner against the accused. Based on the said report, police registered C.R.No.153 of 2007 against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
(F) Pursuant to the registration of crime, Investigating Officer collected necessary papers, recorded statements of witnesses and also collected post mortem report. Accused was arrested. Shirt on the person of accused, having blood stains, was seized under the panchanama. Muddemal property was sent to Chemical Analyser. Map of the spot of incident was got prepared.
(G) After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Sangamner, who, in turn, the case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, committed the same to the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangamner.
(H) The learned trial Judge framed charge against the accused for the offence under section 302 of IPC. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.
3. To bring home the guilt to accused, prosecution has examined six witnesses. PW 1 Navnath (Exhibit 12) is the son of accused so also complainant. PW 2 is Babasaheb (Exhibit 14) who arrived at the spot after hearing hue and cry of deceased so also took her to the hospital. PW 3 is Dhondiba (Exhibit 16), who also heard hue and cry of deceased and reached to the house of accused. He saw the accused coming out of the house and that the deceased was lying in the pool of blood. PW 4 is Namdeo – Police Constable (Exhibit 17), who carried to the muddemal articles to the Chemical Analyser. PW 5 is Wasim Pathan, Circle Officer (Exhibit 20), who prepared the map of the spot of incident. PW 6 is Sunil Bacchav, Police Sub Inspector and Investigating Officer (Exhibit 23).
4. The learned trial Judge, after recording statements of prosecution witnesses also recorded statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Defence of the accused was that, he has been falsely implicated in the case, he does not remember anything about the incident and that he is suffering from mental disorder. The learned trial Judge heard both the sides and ultimately by his judgment and order, as s
