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

2020 Supreme(Bom) 771

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Revati Mohite Dere, M.S. Karnik, JJ.
Shahenaj Amjed Shaikh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 464 of 2014
Decided On : 26-08-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Aniket Vagal, Advocate, J.P. Yagnik, Advocate

The central legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant's actions, influenced by the deceased's violent behavior and alcohol addiction, warranted a conviction under Section 304 Part II of the IPC rather than Section 302, based on the circumstances and the nature of the injuries.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC Section 302, IPC Section 304 Part II - The court analyzed the evidence and found that the appellant's intention was not to commit murder but to save herself and her sons from the deceased's violent behavior. The court referred to the legal provisions under Section 302 and Section 304 Part II of the IPC and altered the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II based on the circumstances of the case.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the ofence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. The case involved the murder of the appellant's husband, who was addicted to liquor and had a history of quarreling with the appellant and her sons. The appellant and her sons tied the deceased to a cot, leading to his death the next day.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant's intention was not to commit murder but to protect herself and her sons from the deceased's violent behavior. The court analyzed the evidence and concluded that the case fell under Section 304 Part II of the IPC, altering the appellant's conviction accordingly.

Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant's actions constituted murder under Section 302 of the IPC or a lesser ofense under Section 304 Part II of the IPC, considering the circumstances and the deceased's behavior.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the injuries, the appellant's conduct, and the deceased's history of violence and alcohol addiction to determine the appropriate legal provision for the conviction.

Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, altering the appellant's conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II of the IPC and reducing her sentence to the period already served, along with a fine. The appellant was set at liberty forthwith.

JUDGMENT

M.S. Karnik, J. - The appellant-Shahenaj Amjed Shaikh by this Appeal challenges the judgment rendered by the II Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur thereby convicting her for the ofence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) and sentenced her to sufer Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay fne of Rs.1,000/- in default sufer further Rigorous Imprisonment for three months. The appellant is also convicted for the ofence punishable under Section 342 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced to sufer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay fne of Rs.500/- in default sufer further Rigorous Imprisonment for two months.

2. The date of the incident is 6th June 2011. PW-2 - Rehman Imam Shaikh is the frst informant. The prosecution case is that the appellant and her two sons murdered Amjed. Amjed was the husband of the appellant. Amjed was discharging duties of ftling work in a factory. He was residing with the appellant and his sons. As per the deposition of PW-2, Amjed is the son of his maternal aunt Jaibundi. Jaibundi resides with her elder son Yusuf-PW-3, his wife and children. Amjed was addicted to liquor and quarreling with wife and children. PW-1 - Gulab Husen Shaikh, Amjed's maternal uncle persuaded him to give up the habit of drinking. Amjed was aggrieved with his wife and children taking money from his pocket. PW-1 tried to persuade Amjed, the appellant and his children not to quarrel. PW-1 says that on 5th June 2011 at 4.30 p.m. he was informed by his maternal aunt Jaibundi and PW-3 - Yusuf that the appellant and her sons have tied Amjed in the house since 11.00 a.m. They requested PW-2 - Rehman to come over immediately as the accused are not allowing anybody to enter the house. PW-2 - Rehman had been to the house of Amjed between 6.00 to 6.30 p.m. The appellant and her sons Irfan and Umarfarook were sitting in front of the house. The door was locked from outside. The accused informed PW-2 that Amjed is not allowing them to eat anything since morning and therefore they had to tie him in the house. When PW-2 asked them to open the door, they were reluctant as according to them Amjed will beat them. The accused called upon PW-2 to give in writing that Amjed will not quarrel with them. Upon PW-2's insistence to open the lock, Amjed's elder son Irfan reluctantly opened it. Irfan then opened another lock in the second room where Amjed was tied to the cot. The appellant refused to enter in that room. PW-2 asked her to go outside. PW-2 saw Amjed's both hands and legs were tied with a rope. Amjed said that the accused have tied him since morning and have not given him any food. Amjed also said that the accused beat him by a wooden stick on his leg. PW-2 saw blood on the leg. He also saw blood under the cot.

3. When PW-2 requested the accused to untie Amjed, they were reluctant as according to them Amjed will again beat them. When PW-2 assured them that he will take up the responsibility for their safety, the accused untied Amjed. Deceased Amjed was crying due to pain. His hands were swollen. He could barely stand. Amjed said that the accused had beaten him. His legs had injuries. PW-2 requested the accused to shift him to the hospital but they refused. Thereafter, PW-2 left and went home.

4. The next day in the morning of 6th June 2011 at 7.00 a.m., the appellant and her sons came to the house of PW-2 and told him that Amjed is lying motionless and not speaking. PW-2 went to the house of deceased Amjed. He saw Amjed lying on the cot. He was dead. The complaint was lodged by PW-2 with the Vijapur Naka Police Station at Exhibit 34.

5. The investigation was taken over by PW-8 - Ashfakahmed Allauddin Shaikh, Assistant Police Inspector. The inquest panchanama was drawn up at Exhibit 23. The dead body was sent for postmortem to the Civil Hospital, Solapur. The postmortem notes are at Exhibit 55. The probable cause of death is stated to be head injury. PW-6 - Dr

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top