State of Maharashtra vs Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(Bom) 1907

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
RANJIT, ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.
The State of Maharashtra and others - Appellants
Versus
Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule and others - Respondents
Confirmation Case No. 03 of 2013 with Criminal Appeal Nos. 426, 416, 452, 508, 528 & 600 of 2013 & 896 of 2014 with Criminal Application No. 191 of 2014 in Appeal 452 of 2013
Decided on : 11-03-2016.

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Jagdish Shetty, Advocate, Anjali Patil, Advocate, Shweta Sangtani, Advocate, Prashant Aher, Advocate, Rohini Salian Spl. PP., V.R. Bhosale, Mahesh Vaswani a/w. Niranjan Mundargi, Dharini Nagda, Anushree Kulkarni, Lata Shanbhag, Shama Mulla, Vikram Ssutaria, Omkar Mulekar and Shishir Hire, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Ramchandra Karanjule, Advocate.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 201, 302 and 498-A-Evidence Act, 1872, Sections 3 and 106-Acquittal from charge of murder.-Since homicidal death of deceased caused by accused is proved beyond all reasonable doubt hence acquittal of accused set aside.
       The prosecution has proved the case under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code i.e. the respondent first stabbed his wife and caused her death and thereafter to cause disappearance of evidence, he set the dead body of `N` on fire. However, as far as Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code is concerned, the prosecution has only relied on the evidence of PW 5, who was the aunt of `N`. She had only stated that the respondent used to drink daily and he used to beat his wife `N`. These are vague allegations and no specific incident had been stated by PW 5. Looking to the same, Court is not inclined to set aside the acquittal under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code.
       Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 8-Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302-Motive for murder.-Merely because in a case based on circumstantial evidence, motive is not proved, it not means that accused entitled to acquittal.
       In the present case, the circumstances overwhelmingly show that the respondent, his wife and their son were in the house, the door was locked from inside, the wife of the respondent was found to have sustained stab injury on her abdomen, which resulted in her death and thereafter she was set on fire. In such case, Section 106 of the Evidence Act would definitely come into play. The evidence on record shows that the appellant and the deceased were in the house at the time of the incident. The door was locked from inside. In such case, the accused has to explain how his wife `N` sustained injuries and died. In this connection, Court may refer to Section 106 of the Evidence Act. Section 106 of the Evidence Act provides that when any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.
       In several recent decisions, the Supreme Court has held that the principle which underlies Section 106 of the Evidence Act can be applied in similar cases. In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram, (2006) 12 SCC 254 : AIR 2007 SC 144 the Supreme Court has observed that if the accused fails to offer an explanation on the basis of facts within his special knowledge, he fails to discharge the burden cast upon him by Section 106 of the Evidence Act. In a case resting on circumstantial evidence if the accused fails to offer a reasonable explanation in discharge of the burden placed on him, that itself provides an additional link in the chain of circumstances proved against him. Section 106 lays down that when the accused does not throw any light upon facts which are specially within his knowledge and which could not support any theory or hypothesis compatible with his innocence, the Court can consider his failure to adduce any explanation as an additional link which completes the chain.

JUDGMENT :

Anuja Prabhudessai, J.

These appeals challenge the impugned the judgment and order dated 21.3.2013 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay in Sessions Case No. 688 of 2011, whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted the Respondents in Appeal No. 896 of 2015 and convicted and sentenced the Appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 416 of 2013, 426 of 2013, 452 of 2013, 508 of 2013, 528 of 2013 and 600 of 2013 as under:-

Ac. No.

Name of accused

Charged for offence under sections

Convicted for offence and sentence

Acquitted for offence.

S. 302

302 r/w.s. 23 of JJ Act. Death

S. 307

7 Yrs RI & fine Rs.2000 i/d 3 months SI.

S. 376 (2) (c)

Life imprisonment & fine of Rs. 5000 i/d 1 yr. SI

S. 376(2) (g)

Life imprisonment fine of Rs. 5000 i/d 1 yr. SI

Section 377

10 years RI fine of 3000 i/d 6 months SI.

S.376 (2) (c) r/w.s. 109 r/w. 34, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34 of the IPC.

1

Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule

S. 324

3 years RI and fine of Rs. 1000 i/d. 1 month SI

S. 506 (2)

3 years RI & fine of Rs.1000 i/d. 1 month SI

S. 23 of J.J. Act.

6 Months RI

S. 25 of of J.J. Act. r/w. 34 of the IPC

3 years RI & fine of Rs.2000 i/d. 2 months SI.

2

Nanabhau Laxman Karanjule

Section 354 of the IPC

2 yrs RI & fine of Rs.5000/- i/d. 1 month SI.

S.376(2) (c) r/w.s. 109 r/w/s.34, 376(2) (c), 377, 324, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34, of IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act & Section 25 of J.J. Act r/w.s. 34 of the IPC.

Section 376 (2) (g) of IPC

Life imprisonment & fine of Rs. 5000/- i/d. 1 year SI.

3

Khandu Nanaji Kasbe @ Deepak Mayekar

Section 25 of J.J. Act r/w. Section 34 of IPC

3 yrs. RI and fine of 2000 i/d. 2 Months SI

Section 376, 377, 324 of IPC and section 23 of J.J. Act

4

Prakash Vitthal Khadke

S. 376 (1) of IPC

Life imprisonment & fine of Rs.5000/- & i/d. 1 year SI

S. 376 (2) (c), 377, 324 of the IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act.

5

Smt. Kalyani Ramchandra Karanjule @ Kalyani Shailesh Sarode

S.376 (2) (c) (g) r/w. Section 109, 377, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 IPC & Section 23 of JJ Act.

S. 376(2) (c) r/w. 109 r/w.S. 376 (2) (g) r/w.s.109, 377 r/w.s. 109, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34 of IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act.

6

Ms Sonali

S.307 r/w. 34 of IPC

7 yrs. RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI

Section 324 of IPC

1 Year RI & fine of Rs.500/-i/d. 1 month's SI

S.376(2) (c) r/w. S.109 of IPC

10 Yrs.RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI

Mohan Badade

S.376 (2) (g) r/w. 109 of IPC

10 Yrs. RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI.

S.377 r/w. Section 109 of IPC.

1 year RI & fine of Rs.300 i/d. 1 month's SI.

S. 23 of J.J. Act

3 months RI

7

Dhirubhai Arjun Limbani @ Chanewalaba

Under sections 324 and 354 of the IPC.

S.324 & 354 of IPC

8

Narendra Ramniklal Mehta @ Babadas

Under sections 324 and 354 of the IPC.

S.324 & 354 of IPC

9

Ms Surekha Ramchandra Karanjule

376(2)(c)(g) r/w. sec. 109, 377, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 IPC and Section 23 of J.J.Act.

Section 376 (2)(c) r/w. section 109 r/w.s. 376(2) (g) r/w.s. 109, 377 r/w.s. 109 of IPC & Section 23 of J.J. Act.

Section 304 Part II of IPC Section 324 of IPC

5 yrs.

S. 324 of IPC

1 yr RI with fine Rs. 500 i/d/ One month SI

10

Smt. Parvati Shamsundar Mavle

Section 376 (2)(c) r/w. 109 IPC 376(2) (g) r/w. 109 IPC

10 yrs RI with fine Rs. 2000 i/d. SI 3 months

Section 302 of IPC r/w. section 25 of J.J. Act.

Sec. 377 r/w 109 IP

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Ac. No.	Name of accused	Charged for offence under sections	Convicted for offence and sentence	Acquitted for offence.
		S. 302	302 r/w.s. 23 of JJ Act. Death
		S. 307	7 Yrs RI & fine Rs.2000 i/d 3 months SI.
		S. 376 (2) (c)	Life imprisonment & fine of Rs. 5000 i/d 1 yr. SI
		S. 376(2) (g)	Life imprisonment fine of Rs. 5000 i/d 1 yr. SI
		Section 377	10 years RI fine of 3000 i/d 6 months SI.	S.376 (2) (c) r/w.s. 109 r/w. 34, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34 of the IPC.
1	Ramchandra Sambhaji Karanjule	S. 324	3 years RI and fine of Rs. 1000 i/d. 1 month SI
		S. 506 (2)	3 years RI & fine of Rs.1000 i/d. 1 month SI
		S. 23 of J.J. Act.	6 Months RI
		S. 25 of of J.J. Act. r/w. 34 of the IPC	3 years RI & fine of Rs.2000 i/d. 2 months SI.
2	Nanabhau Laxman Karanjule	Section 354 of the IPC	2 yrs RI & fine of Rs.5000/- i/d. 1 month SI.	S.376(2) (c) r/w.s. 109 r/w/s.34, 376(2) (c), 377, 324, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34, of IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act & Section 25 of J.J. Act r/w.s. 34 of the IPC.
		Section 376 (2) (g) of IPC	Life imprisonment & fine of Rs. 5000/- i/d. 1 year SI.
3	Khandu Nanaji Kasbe @ Deepak Mayekar	Section 25 of J.J. Act r/w. Section 34 of IPC	3 yrs. RI and fine of 2000 i/d. 2 Months SI	Section 376, 377, 324 of IPC and section 23 of J.J. Act
4	Prakash Vitthal Khadke	S. 376 (1) of IPC	Life imprisonment & fine of Rs.5000/- & i/d. 1 year SI	S. 376 (2) (c), 377, 324 of the IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act.
5	Smt. Kalyani Ramchandra Karanjule @ Kalyani Shailesh Sarode	S.376 (2) (c) (g) r/w. Section 109, 377, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 IPC & Section 23 of JJ Act.		S. 376(2) (c) r/w. 109 r/w.S. 376 (2) (g) r/w.s.109, 377 r/w.s. 109, 467, 468, 471 r/w.s. 34 of IPC & Section 23 of J.J.Act.
6	Ms Sonali	S.307 r/w. 34 of IPC	7 yrs. RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI
		Section 324 of IPC	1 Year RI & fine of Rs.500/-i/d. 1 month's SI
		S.376(2) (c) r/w. S.109 of IPC	10 Yrs.RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI
	Mohan Badade	S.376 (2) (g) r/w. 109 of IPC	10 Yrs. RI & fine of Rs.2000/- i/d. 3 months SI.
		S.377 r/w. Section 109 of IPC.	1 year RI & fine of Rs.300 i/d. 1 month's SI.
		S. 23 of J.J. Act	3 months RI
7	Dhirubhai Arjun Limbani @ Chanewalaba	Under sections 324 and 354 of the IPC.		S.324 & 354 of IPC
8	Narendra Ramniklal Mehta @ Babadas	Under sections 324 and 354 of the IPC.		S.324 & 354 of IPC
9	Ms Surekha Ramchandra Karanjule	376(2)(c)(g) r/w. sec. 109, 377, 467, 468, 471 r/w. 34 IPC and Section 23 of J.J.Act.		Section 376 (2)(c) r/w. section 109 r/w.s. 376(2) (g) r/w.s. 109, 377 r/w.s. 109 of IPC & Section 23 of J.J. Act.
		Section 304 Part II of IPC Section 324 of IPC	5 yrs.
		S. 324 of IPC	1 yr RI with fine Rs. 500 i/d/ One month SI
10	Smt. Parvati Shamsundar Mavle	Section 376 (2)(c) r/w. 109 IPC 376(2) (g) r/w. 109 IPC	10 yrs RI with fine Rs. 2000 i/d. SI 3 months	Section 302 of IPC r/w. section 25 of J.J. Act.
		Sec. 377 r/w 109 IP

2016 Supreme(Bom) 1907

Cases Referred (20)