Back
2013 Supreme(Bom) 2661
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
V. K. Tahilramani and Sadhana S. Jadhav, JJ.
DEVBAHADUR JAIKRUSHNA DAGAL – Petitioners
Vs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1119 of 2006
Decided On : 04-02-2013
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Prosper D'souza
For the Respondent: P. S. Hingorani
The central legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of evidence to determine the intention of the accused in causing the death, leading to the application of section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
Stabbing - Murder - Indian Penal Code, section 302 - The judgment discusses the evidence and circumstances leading to the conviction of the Appellant for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The court analyzes the witness testimonies, the recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapon, and the contention of false implication. The court concludes that the intention of the Appellant was to cause death, leading to the dismissal of the Appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The Appellant was convicted for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for stabbing and causing the death of the deceased Sudhakar.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Appellant guilty based on the evidence of eyewitnesses, recovery of blood-stained clothes and weapon, and the nature of injuries inflicted on the deceased.
Issues: The issues revolved around the identification of the Appellant as the assailant, the recovery of blood-stained evidence, and the contention of false implication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the quality of evidence, the nature of injuries, and the absence of evidence supporting the contention of false implication.
Final Decision: The Appeal was dismissed, affirming the conviction of the Appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.
The Appellant/Original Accused has preferred this Appeal against the Judgment and order dated 20th April, 2006, passed by the learned 5th Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 837 of 2005. By the said Judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the Appellant for the offence under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/ (Rs. One Thousand only) in default R.I. for six months.
2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as under :
The complainant P.W.1 Sandip Therade was the elder brother of deceased Sudhakar. Deceased Sudhakar and his brother Sandip Therade were residing in the same area. Their sister Sugandha was residing nearby in Subhash Nagar. P.W. 2 Sandip Gavade was the husband of their sister Sugandha. The Appellant was known to the witnesses. On 28th July, 2005, it was Sudhakar's birthday. The incident took place at about 10.00 to 10.15 p.m. At about 8.00 p.m. on that day, P.W.1 Sandip Therade went to the house of his brother as it was birthday of Sudhakar Therade. They sat there for some time then Sandip told Sudhakar that he will go to the house of his sister Sugandha. He then went to the house of Sugandha. Sugandha's husband P.W.2 Gavade was present in the house. While P.W.1 Sandip Therade and P.W.2 Sandip Gavade were chitchatting at about 9.45 p.m. Sudhakar came to the house of his sister Sugandha. Sudhakar told P.W.1 Sandip and P.W.2 Gavade to come to his house alongwith him. Thereafter all of them started going towards his house. Sudhakar was residing in Sundar Nagar. When they reached near Chawl No. 11 in Sunder Nagar, they saw a quarrel was going on between P.W.3 Sham and the Appellant. When Sudhakar went to pacify the quarrel which was going on in between Sham and the Appellant, as soon as Sudhakar intervened in the quarrel the Appellant suddenly took out a dagger and inflicted blows on left side of chest of Sudhakar. Sudhakar sustained bleeding injury on his chest. Sudhakar shouted and fell on the ground. He became unconcious. The Appellant ran away. Then P.W.1 Sandip and P.W.2 Gavade put Sudhakar in an auto rickshaw and took him to Holly Spirit Hospital. Doctor examined him and declared him dead. Then P.W.1 Sandip lodged First Information Report (Exhibit-8). Thereafter the investigation commenced. The dead body of Sudhakar was sent for post mortem. P.W.9 Dr. Kachare performed post-mortem on the dead body of Sudhakar. On external examination of the dead body he found following injuries :
"i. Incised wound at anterior of left chest below left nipple - horizontal size of 3 cm x 1 cm cavity deep, reddish both angle acute.
ii Incised wound in left mid axillary line 5 cm below left nipple, vertical size of 1 cm x ¼ cm x cavity deep reddish angles acute.
iii. CLW near nipple size of ¼ cm x 0.5 cm x 1 cm reddish.
iv. Abrasion over right chest near right nipple 1 cm x 1 cm reddish.
He found following internal injuries :
A. Thorax - walls, ribs, cartilages - left sides, 4th and 5th ribs fracture.
B. Pleura - ruptured at left side haemorrhage are seen.
E. Left lung - incise wound at lingula 2 cm x 1 cm muscle deep reddish.
F. Pericardium - ruptured.
G. Heart - ruptured incised wound at anterior wall 1.5 cm x 1 cm x cavity deep reddish.
In his opinion the cause of death was haemorrhage and shock due to incise wounds (unnatural). According to him the above injuries are sufficient to cause death of the deceased in ordinary course of nature and the injuries mentioned above are possible due to infliction of blow by knife like Art. H. The injuries were on the vital part of the deceased.
3. The Appellant was arrested on 29th July, 2005 i.e. on the next day. During the course of investigation, blood stained clothes and the weapon i.e. Article-"H" came to be recovered at the instance of the Appellant. These articles were sent to the C.A. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed.
4. Ch
