The judgment established the need for clear reasoning in establishing the offence of murder and emphasized the importance of analyzing the intention and circumstances of the accused's actions.

JUDGMENT :

Vinay Joshi, J.

Mother and son were tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’) for committing murder of another son (Gajanan). Mother was additionally charged for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon to prosecution witnesses Seema, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC.

2. The Trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 25.07.2022 in Sessions Case No.17 of 2017 convicted the accused no.1 Ramesh @ Shyam (son) for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, whilst acquitted accused no.2 Sugandhabai (mother) from the charge of murder. However, Trial Court has convicted accused no. 2 Sugandhabai, for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC. The Trial Court has sentenced accused no.1 Ramesh to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. Accused no.2 Sugandhabai was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.2,000/-, for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction, both accused have appealed in terms of Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘the Code’).

3. The facts of the prosecution case in brief are that, deceased Gajanan was the real brother of accused no.1 Ramesh and son of accused no.2 Sugandhabai. Both brothers were residing separately adjacent to each other. Deceased Gajanan was residing with his wife Seema, minor son Suyog and daughter Vidisha. Both brothers had a property dispute for which deceased Gajanan had filed a Civil Suit.

4. On 09.06.2013, around 4.00 pm deceased Gajanan was talking with neighboring person namely Dashrath Pethkar and his wife, in front of his house. Informant Seema was at her doorstep. At relevant time, accused no.1 Ramesh was cutting firewood across the road, by means of axe. Deceased Gajanan had consumed Kharra (sort of Tobacco) which he spitted. Accused Ramesh got annoyed and started to assault Gajanan by means of axe by saying that ‘why you spitted by looking to me’. He dealt the axe blows at the head of Gajanan on which the latter fell down. Accused Ramesh also gave axe blow at his left thigh causing bleeding injury. Informant Seema rushed at the rescue of her husband Gajanan, however accused no.2 Sugandhabai caught her hair and by blunt side of axe dealt a blow. Injured Gajanan was shifted to the Hospital where he succumbed to the injuries on the following day. The informant Seema rushed to the Concerned Police, and lodged the report regarding occurrence.

5. Initially, crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC. During the course of investigation Panchanama of the scene of offence was drawn, clothes of deceased as well as accused were seized. Blood samples were collected. At the instance of the accused Ramesh weapon used in the commission of crime was seized. Postmortem was conducted on the dead body, inquest panchanama was drawn, statement of eye-witnesses have been recorded. On completion of investigation, final report has been filed. Both accused denied the guilt and put the prosecution to the task of establishing levelled charges with requisite standard of proof. The prosecution has examined in all 16 witnesses and also banked upon certain documents to bring home the guild of the accused. The Trial Court held that Gajanan met with a homicidal death. Accused no.1 Ramesh assaulted Gajanan and thereby committed the offence of murder. So also, the Trial Court held that Accused no.2 Sugandhabai caused hurt to the informant Seema, by means of dangerous weapon. On said finding trial Court has imposed aforementioned sentence.

6. Heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Manohar appearing for the accused, on facts, as well as on law. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Manohar has not disputed the homicidal death of Gajanan, however endeavour