Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Vibha Kankanwadi, Abhay S.Waghwase, JJ.
Shaikh Akbar - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 323 of 2017
Decided On : 11-09-2023
CRIMINAL LAW - Murder and Cruelty - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 498-A - The court discussed the provisions of Sections 302 and 498-A of the IPC, which pertain to murder and cruelty towards a woman by her husband or relatives. The court interpreted these sections in the context of the evidence presented, emphasizing the direct eyewitness accounts of the accused's actions leading to the victim's death. The court concluded that the evidence sufficiently established the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, affirming the conviction under both sections.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife, Rehana, and for cruelty under IPC Sections 302 and 498-A. The incident occurred on April 15, 2016, when the appellant was found throttling Rehana in their home, leading to her death. The prosecution presented eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence to establish the circumstances of the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented, including eyewitness testimonies and medical reports, corroborated the prosecution's case. The court dismissed the appellant's claims of improper representation and lack of fair trial, asserting that the trial was conducted properly and the evidence was sufficient to uphold the conviction.
Issues: Whether the accused was guilty of murder and cruelty as charged, and whether he received a fair trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that direct evidence from multiple eyewitnesses, including family members and police officers, established the accused's guilt. The court emphasized that motive is less significant when direct evidence of the crime is available. The accused's failure to provide an alibi or sufficient explanation for the circumstances of the crime further supported the conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction of the appellant for murder and cruelty was upheld, with the sentences to run concurrently.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. - Present appeal has been filed by the original accused challenging his conviction for the offence punishable under Sec. 302, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna in Sessions Case No.101/2016 on 4/7/2017.
2. It is not in dispute that deceased Rehana got married to the accused about 2 1/2 years prior to First Information Report dtd. 16/4/2016. Deceased Rehana and appellant were residing at Sanmitra Colony, Partur, Dist. Jalna. Rehana was blessed with two sons; one is Asad aged 1 1/2 and second Ayan aged 08 months at the time of incident. They both were residing in a rented premises away from the parents of the appellant.
3. The law was set in motion by Afsarkhan Kabirkhan Pathan by lodging First Information Report on 16/4/2016. He is the father of deceased Rehana. He was also residing in rented premises in Sanmitra Colony. He has five sons and three daughters including deceased Rehana. He alleged that accused was raising suspicion over the character of deceased and there used to be quarrels between them. Appellant used to assault Rehana by raising suspicion. Rehana used to convey the cruelty meted to her to the informant and thereupon informant used to console her. Around 7.00 p.m. on 15/4/2016 when he was sitting in front of his house after dinner, he came to know around 9.30 p.m. that quarrels are going on between his son-in-law and daughter and the son-in-law is assaulting daughter. Therefore, informant went to the house of Rehana along with his wife and son Amjad. People had gathered in front of the house and the door of the house was closed. He himself, his wife and son Amjad then peeped in from the gap of the door and found that Rehana was in supine position on the ground near cot. The appellant was throttling her with both hands and the children were crying. Informant and his son as well as the people, who had gathered, requested accused to open the door, but he did not and, therefore, somebody called police. After the arrival of the police, Jamadar Mr. Suradkar and Mr. Dusane convinced accused to open the door. Thereupon accused opened the door and then it was found that Rehana was in unconscious state. Police made arrangement to shift her to Government Hospital, Partur in police jeep, however, after examining him Doctor declared her as dead. Around 00.45 hours on 16/4/2016 the First Information Report was registered.
4. It is the prosecution story that the accused was taken in custody from the spot and after the registration of the First Information Report he came to be arrested. After Rehana was declared dead, inquest panchnama was executed in presence of two panchas and the dead body was sent for postmortem. The panchnama of the spot was carried out and certain articles were seized from the spot. The medical examination of the accused was got done. Certain samples of Rehana as well as accused were taken and sent for analysis. Statements of witnesses came to be recorded and after the completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed.
5. After the committal of the case, the charge was framed and trial has been conducted. Prosecution has examined in all 08 witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused and after considering the evidence on record and hearing both sides the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna held the accused guilty. The accused has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay find of Rs.5, 000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand only), in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for committing an offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Further, he has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.1, 000.00 (Rupees One Thousand only), in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for four months for committing an offence punishable under Sec. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were directed to ru
The judgment establishes that in criminal cases, particularly those relying on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and any reasonable....
In criminal cases, consistent and credible evidence is essential; discrepancies and reliance on related witnesses can undermine the prosecution's case and result in acquittal.
Conviction for murder under 302 IPC requires clear evidence of motive and intent; significant delays and contradictions among witnesses can warrant reasonable doubt, necessitating acquittal.
The burden of proving any exception to the definition of murder under section 300 of the IPC lies on the accused, and failure to discharge this burden can lead to upholding the conviction for murder.
When the circumstances are corroborated by medical report and proved motive, accused has to be convicted. In case of variance between inquest report and medical report the latter will prevail.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and any significant doubt arising from inconsistencies in evidence must benefit the accused.
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
