SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Bom) 1882

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
T.V. NALAWADE, ARUN M. DHAVALE, JJ.
Manohar s/o. Mahadu Kate – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.404 OF 2002
Decided on : 20-11-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. B.S. Kudale, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. V.S. Badakh

The judgment establishes the principle that circumstantial evidence, motive, subsequent conduct, and the absence of a satisfactory explanation can be used to establish guilt in cases of murder.

Headnote:

MURDER - Domestic Violence - Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 302, Section 498-A, Section 34 - The judgment discusses the evidence and circumstances leading to the conviction of the appellant for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the IPC. It highlights the motive, subsequent conduct, and circumstantial evidence that pointed to the guilt of the accused. The court also refers to relevant case laws to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant is convicted for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the IPC. The deceased, who was the wife of the appellant, had returned to her parents' house due to ill-treatment. After attempts to reconcile, she was sent back to the matrimonial house, where she was found dead. The prosecution presented evidence of strangulation as the cause of death.

Finding of the Court:

The Trial Court found the appellant guilty of murder based on circumstantial evidence, including the motive, subsequent conduct, and the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the circumstances. The court also relied on the provisions of section 106 read with section 114 of the Evidence Act to draw inferences against the accused.

Issues: The key issues revolved around the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased, the motive behind the murder, and the subsequent conduct of the accused. The court also considered the absence of a satisfactory explanation from the accused for the incriminating circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on circumstantial evidence, motive, subsequent conduct, and the provisions of section 106 read with section 114 of the Evidence Act to establish the guilt of the accused for the offence of murder. Relevant case laws were also cited to support the decision.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was held guilty for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the IPC. The court also quantified the fees of the appointed counsel for the appellant.

JUDGMENT :

T.V. NALAWADE, J.

1. The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 2/2001, which was pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nilanga, District Latur. The appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and he is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/-. Heard learned counsel Shri. Kudale, who is appointed counsel and the learned APP.

2. In short, the facts leading to the institution of the present appeal can be stated as follows :-

Deceased Vijayabai (Sujata) was the wife of appellant/accused. The appellant is resident of Savri, Tahsil Nilanga. Kadaji is the father of deceased. He is resident of village Dapka, Tahsil Nilanga. The deceased was given in marriage to the appellant 5-6 years prior to the date of incident and she has left behind one daughter aged about 2-3 years.

3. After marriage, the deceased cohabited with the appellant in village Savri. There was some dispute and after two years of marriage, the deceased had returned to the house of her parents. The deceased used to complain about the ill-treatment which she was receiving from the appellant and her mother. When she returned to the parent's house, she was pregnant and she delivered female child when she was living in the house of Kadaji. She stayed there for about two years. After her delivery, Kadaji made attempts to see that the deceased is sent back to the matrimonial house, but the accused refused to accept the deceased back in the matrimonial house. To pressurize the appellant/accused, the deceased filed maintenance proceeding against him. After that the appellant went to the house of Kadaji, he gave undertaking to behave well and then Kadaji agreed to send the deceased back to the matrimonial house.

4. Few days prior to the Nagpanchami festival, the appellant had visited the house of Kadaji and Kadaji had agreed to send the deceased after celebrating Nagpanchami festival. The deceased was sent to the matrimonial house and that was done about two months prior to the date of incident.

5. Appellant was living separate from his father since 10 years. On 1.10.2000 the villagers realized that Vijayabai was dead and her dead body was lying in the house of appellant. Gopal Suryawanshi is the person from the community of the appellant and after learning about the death in the morning, he went to the house of appellant at about 6.00 p.m. He noticed that father of appellant was sitting outside of house and he was taking care of daughter of deceased. On inquiry, father of appellant said that he had no knowledge about the whereabouts of appellant. Gopal entered the room and he noticed that the dead body of the deceased was lying there, but it was covered by using blanket. Gopal gave A.D. report to Kasarshirsi Police Station and A.D. No. 23/2000 came to be registered.

6. Assistant Police Inspector Shri. Gaikwad of Kasarshirsi Police Station started making inquiry in to A.D. He prepared inquest panchanama and he sent the dead body for post mortem ('P.M.' for short) examination. He prepared the panchanama of the spot, of the room of the appellant and he noticed that pieces of bangles were lying in the room and cap having blood stains was also lying there. One ditch having sufficient depth which was recently made was also found there and the floor of the room appeared to be wet showing that recently an attempt was made to clean it. In the meantime, Kadaji, father of deceased reached Savri and after P.M. was conducted on the dead body, he gave report against present appellant and his mother. On the basis of this report, the crime at C.R. No. 130/2000 came to be registered for offences punishable under sections 498-A, 302 r/w. 34 of IPC against the appellant and his mother. Doctor had given opinion that the death had taken place due to strangulation.

7. During investigation of the crime, statements of various persons including the relatives of dec
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top