Back
2016 Supreme(Bom) 1234
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NARESH H. PATIL & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.
Uttam Vaiju Majukar Adult - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra At the instance of Dewarwadi Police Station - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 729 OF 2008
Decided on : 22-09-2016
For the Appellant : Dr. Yug Mohit Chaudhary
For the Respondent: Mr. J. P. Yagnik, Appellant
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 120-B - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC Section 302, IPC Section 34, IPC Section 120-B - The court acquitted two accused and convicted the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant's conviction was later substituted to a lesser offence under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant and two other accused were charged for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case involved an incident where the appellant assaulted the deceased with a knife, resulting in the deceased's death. The prosecution presented evidence from multiple witnesses and the medical officer's report.
Finding of the Court:
The court found inconsistencies in the evidence of the eye witnesses and the nature of the injuries inflicted. The court concluded that the appellant's assault on the deceased was not intended to cause such a bodily injury which would result in his death. The court, therefore, substituted the appellant's conviction to a lesser offence under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
Issues: Inconsistencies in the evidence of the eye witnesses, nature of injuries inflicted, and the intention behind the appellant's assault on the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the injuries, inconsistencies in the evidence, and the lack of premeditation in the appellant's assault on the deceased. The court concluded that the appellant's assault was not intended to cause such a bodily injury which would result in the deceased's death, leading to the substitution of the appellant's conviction to a lesser offence under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the appellant's conviction for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and convicting the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC, sentencing the appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.
Naresh H. Patil, J.
1. The appellant and other two accused were charged for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj in Sessions Case No. 5 of 2006. The accused pleaded not guilty.
2. By the judgment and order dated 3/5/2008, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, acquitted original accused no. 2 - Vaiju Shivappa Majukar and original accused no. 3 – Waman Hiramani Jadhav for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant/original accused no.1 – Uttam Vaiju Majukar was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay find of Rs.5000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that all the accused and the deceased were residents of village Dewarwadi. The acquitted accused-Waman Jadhav, was President of Vaijnath Temple and another acquitted accused-Vaiju Majukar was the Secretary. Said temple was administered by Pacchim Maharashtra Devasthan Samittee. The deceased and the accused persons were not on good terms. In relation to the administration of the temple, the deceased had filed complaint against Waman Jadhav and Vaiju Majukar. The matter was contested upto High Court. The High Court had directed for calling of meeting of the Pacchim Maharashtra Devasthan Samittee for electing new panel for administering Vaijanath Temple, which is located in the village. In a meeting held for the said purpose, the panel of deceased and his family members got elected for administering the affairs of the temple. The name of the deceased is Suresh Annappa Bhogan.
4. It is the prosecution case that on the date of the incident i.e. 22/1/2006, there was election of Vaijnath Vividha Karyakari Sahakari Sanstha. The panel of the cousin of the deceased participated in the said election. Deceased Suresh had also taken part in the said election. The panel of the cousin of the deceased got elected. One of the members of their panel, namely, Nagoji Adav was defeated.
5. The prosecution case further suggests that accused were burning crackers in front of the house of Nagoji Adav. There was quarrel between Nagoji Adav and the persons from the group of accused. Deceased Suresh came on the spot. There was some altercation between the accused and deceased Suresh. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased was stabbed by appellant/accused – Uttam Majukar son of accused – Vaiju Majukar. After the incident, all the accused persons ran away from the spot. Suresh was taken to hospital of Dr. Tarale situated at Dewarwadi. He was further referred to KLE Hospital, Belgaon. During treatment, he succumbed to the injuries.
6. Police was informed on phone about the incident. Information was recorded in the station diary. PI Angad Jadhavar received information. Head Constable was deputed to visit Belgaon KLE Hospital . It is the prosecution case that Police Head Constable Surange recorded the statement of Vaijnath Bhogan, which was forwarded by the police constable to police station for registration of offence. The Investigating Officer drew spot panchanama on 23/1/2006, collected dung mixed soil. Photographs of the spot of incident were taken. The Investigating Officer went to KLE Hospital at Belgaon, collected blood sample of deceased for sending it to Chemical Analyzer. On the same day, appellant/accused -Uttam was arrested by PSI Naik. The clothes on the person of accused - Uttam were seized under panchanama. Accused – Uttam was sent to hospital for collecting sample of his blood. Thereafter the Investigating Officer recorded statements of persons. A motorcycle, on which deceased Suresh was ridding prior to the incident, was seized. At the instance of accused – Uttam, knife and sweater were seized, while he was in custody. The Investigating O
