Back
2016 Supreme(Bom) 2169
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
Baliram S/o Hausaji Ingole – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Kurunda - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 158, 205 of 2013
Decided On : 15-09-2016
For the Appellant :Mr. Vikram R. Dhorde, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. D.R. Kale, A.P.P.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's interpretation of the evidence presented, including the delay in filing the report, the credibility of the ocular witnesses, and the absence of independent witnesses. The court's decision was influenced by the direct evidence of the assault and the corroboration of the ocular evidence by the medical evidence.
Headnote:
Criminal Assault - Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 304 Part II, 323, 448 - The judgment discusses the incident of criminal assault resulting in the death of the victim, the evidence presented by the prosecution, and the court's analysis of the evidence. The court found accused No. 2 guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II and sentenced him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000. Accused No. 1 was convicted for simple imprisonment and fined Rs. 500 for the offences under Sections 323 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Kishan sustained serious injuries in an assault by accused Nos. 1 and 2. He succumbed to the injuries after ten days. The incident arose from a dispute over water falling from the roof of the deceased's house into the accused's house. The informant, the deceased's wife, lodged a report three days after the incident, citing her priority to seek medical treatment for the deceased as the reason for the delay.
Finding of the Court:
The court found accused No. 2 guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II and sentenced him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000. Accused No. 1 was convicted for simple imprisonment and fined Rs. 500 for the offences under Sections 323 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code.
Issues: The court analyzed the delay in filing the report, the credibility of the ocular witnesses, and the absence of independent witnesses. The court also considered the motive behind the incident and the nature of the injuries sustained by the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in filing the report was justified due to the informant's priority to seek medical treatment for the deceased. The court found the evidence of the ocular witnesses to be consistent and reliable, despite the absence of independent witnesses. The court also ruled that the motive behind the incident was not crucial in the presence of direct evidence of the assault. The medical evidence corroborated the ocular evidence, leading to the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2.
Final Decision: Accused No. 2 was convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000. Accused No. 1 was convicted for simple imprisonment and fined Rs. 500 for the offences under Sections 323 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code.
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.
1. Appeal No. 158 of 2013 has been preferred by original accused no. 1 - Baliram Hausaji Ingole while Appeal No. 205 of 2013 has been preferred by accused no. 2 - Prakash Baliram Ingole, challenging their conviction and sentences passed against them by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Basmat District-Hingoli on 14th March, 2013 in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 2012. Since both these appeals have arisen out of the same criminal case, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. For the sake of convenience, the appellants are herein-after referred to by their original nomenclature i.e. accused no. 1 and accused no. 2. There were two more accused persons who have been acquitted by the trial Court. They also are referred to by their original nomenclature i.e. accused no. 3 and accused no. 4, wherever, their reference would be necessary.
3. Accused No. 2 and accused No. 3 are the sons, while accused No. 4 is the wife of accused No. 1. The deceased Kishan Tukaram Ingole was the husband of the informant namely Radhabai. The house of the informant is to the East of the house of the accused, situate at village Pardi (Bk.), Taluka Basmat, District Hingoli. It is facing towards West. Thus, the accused are the neighbours of the informant.
4. The case of the respondent (prosecution), in brief, is that on 12th September, 2011 at about 8.00 p.m., the deceased Kishan, aged about 75 years, was lying on the verandah (osri) that was in front of his house. The informant was inside the house. At that time, accused No. 1 came in front of the house of the informant and started hurling abuses on the say that the waste water from the iron-sheet roof of the house of the informant was falling in his house. Then accused No. 2 also came there armed with an iron bar. He gave blows of iron bar on the head, near both the ears, on the right hand and legs of the deceased Kishan. The deceased Kishan sustained serious injuries. His right hand got fractured. Accused Nos. 3 and 4 also hurled abuses against the deceased Kishan. Accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 beat the deceased Kishan by fists and chappals. The informed raised shouts whereon, her neighbours Janabai Chanduji Narwade, Kundlik Tukaram Ingole, Kavita Suresh Bhutkar and others came there and intervened to pacify the incident.
5. The deceased Kishan was taken to Kurunda Police Station from where he was referred to P.H.C., Kurunda and then was shifted to Sub-District Hospital at Basmat. After extending preliminary treatment at Basmat, he was referred to the Civil Hospital at Nanded. The informant had accompanied the deceased Kishan. She lodged the First Information Report ("the report", for short) in respect of the incident in Police Station, Kurunda on 15th September, 2011 at about 7.10 p.m. On the basis of that report, Crime No. 68 of 2011 came to be registered against accused Nos. 1 to 4 for the offences punishable under sections 325, 326, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "I.P.C.").
6. The investigation followed. The spot panchanama came to be prepared. The clothes of the deceased Kishan came to be seized. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 came to be arrested on 16th September, 2011, while accused Nos. 1 and 4 on 17th September, 2011. An iron rod came to be seized from accused No. 2 under a panchanama on 16th September, 2011. The statements of the witnesses were recorded.
7. The injured Kishan expired during treatment in the Government Hospital at Nanded on 22nd September, 2011. The postmortem of his body was conducted on the same day between 12.30 p.m. and 1.30 p.m. The Autopsy Surgeon found six external and corresponding internal injuries on the body of the deceased Kishan. He opined that Kishan died due to head injury associated with blunt trauma to chest. He sent viscera of the deceased Kishan for chemical analysis. No poison was detected therein.
8. After the death of Kishan, the offence punishable under section 302 of the I.P. C. came to be added in
