Back
R. G. AVACHAT
Navnath – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.G. avachat, J. - The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.03.2018 in Sessions Case No.282 of 2012. Vide the impugned judgment and order, the appellants herein have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and therefore, sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.
appellant no.2 (original accused no.2) has also been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code and therefore, sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months
2. The facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are as follows:-
PW 1 - Kalidas was resident of village Banpimpli, Tq. Shrigonda. He was professional auto rickshaw driver. He returned home with his auto rickshaw by 7.30 pm. On 22.05.2022. Then, he had been to a temple in the village for darshan. PW 2 - Satish had been to the house of PW 1 - Kalidas 2-3 times. Both PW 1 - Satish and PW 2 - Satish are cousin inter-
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the nature of injuries and the manner of assault in determining the appropriate charge and sentencing for the accused....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the analysis of common intention under the Indian Penal Code and the individual culpability of the accused based on their actions and intentions....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between the offences under Section 302 and Section 304 (Part-1) of the Penal Code, based on the circumstances and intent of the ....
The court reaffirmed that the intention to kill can be established through circumstantial evidence and that joint liability under Section 34 IPC applies when multiple individuals participate in a cri....
The conviction under Section 307 IPC was overturned due to lack of intention to cause death, while convictions under Sections 323, 324, and 341 IPC were upheld.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the determination of common intention in a criminal assault case, considering the nature of injuries, weapons used, and the formation of common ....
The court clarified that mere participation in an assault does not equate to intent to kill, necessitating clear evidence of a common object for murder to uphold convictions under Section 302.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
