Back
VIBHA KANKANWADI, ABHAY S. WAGHWASE
Digambar @ Digu Baburao Shirole – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, Dist.Ahmednagar dated 08-02-2018 thereby convicting appellant for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and thereby sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine, instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant.
CASE OF PROSECUTION IN BRIEF
2. Shrirampur Taluka Police Station chargesheeted appellant for offence under Section 302 of the IPC on the premise that on 20-12-2015 between 04:00 p.m. to 04:30 p.m. accused appellant came to the field of deceased Rajendra and demanded extra saplings from him. When deceased refused, quarrel took place and thereafter, appellant mounted attack on deceased by means of wooden handle of spade. He also used the handle for pressing neck of deceased Rajendra. Deceased was shifted to hospital where Doctor examined and declared him dead.
PW3 Ashok Shirole, brother of deceased, set law into motion on the strength of which, Shrirampur Taluka Police Station registered crime No.I-148 of 2015 and said crime was investigated and on its
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the intention and actions of the appellant, as evidenced by the fatal injuries inflicted on the deceased, warranted the conviction for murder ....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on intention and circumstances, with the court applying Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC in cases of sudden quarrel.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, highlighting that the accused acted with sufficient intent, despite claims of provocation, based on consistent eyewitness testimoni....
The appellant was found guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC and Section 114 IPC, as the injuries were inflicted with the knowledge that they were likely to cause death, and the appellant was not e....
The court reaffirmed that intention and the nature of injuries are critical in distinguishing between murder and culpable homicide under IPC.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, rejecting the appellant's claims of lack of evidence and premeditation. The court dismissed the appellant's plea for a less....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the injury, the presence of a motive prior to the incident, and the absence of provocation are crucial factors in determining th....
The court ruled that the appellant's actions, prompted by provocation and lack of intent to kill, warranted a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC.
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
