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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH
VINAY JOSHI, ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
Jayanand S/o Arjun Dhabale – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 263 of 2021
Decided On : 13-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S.G. Varshani
For the Respondent: A.B. Badar

The prosecution must prove common intention for vicarious liability under Section 34 IPC; mere presence is insufficient for conviction.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 452 - Conviction for murder and house trespass - Appellants convicted for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 and sentenced to life imprisonment, and for house trespass under Section 452 - Acquitted of charges under the Black Magic Act - Evidence of eyewitnesses established the assault on the deceased by accused No. 1 with an axe, while others were present - Prosecution failed to prove common intention for accused Nos. 2 to 4 - Conviction of accused No. 1 upheld, while others acquitted. (Paras 1, 2, 5, 37)

Facts of the case:
The incident occurred on 01-05-2015, where the deceased Sunanda was assaulted by accused No. 1-Jayanand with an axe, leading to her death. The informant, who is the brother of the accused, witnessed the incident and reported it to the police. (Paras 2(i), 2(ii), 2(vi))

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution proved the charge against accused No. 1 under Section 302 IPC, but failed to establish the common intention required for convicting accused Nos. 2 to 4 under Section 34 IPC. (Paras 37)

Issues: The main issues were whether the evidence supported the conviction of the accused under Section 302 IPC and whether the prosecution established common intention for the application of Section 34 IPC. (Paras 5, 36)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the evidence established the guilt of accused No. 1, the prosecution did not prove the necessary common intention for the other accused, leading to their acquittal. (Paras 36, 37)

Result: The appeal is partly allowed; accused No. 1's conviction under Section 302 IPC is upheld, while accused Nos. 2 to 4 are acquitted of the charges. (Paras 38)

JUDGMENT :

ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 02-02-2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad (for short ‘the learned Judge’) in Sessions Trial Case No. 51/2015, convicting the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month each. They are also convicted for an offence punishable under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month each.

2. FACTUAL MATRIX:

    (i) Informant Kishor (PW-1) and accused No. 1-Jayanand are brothers, and the deceased Sunanda was the widow of their late brother Vijay. Kishor and Sunanda reside adjacent. Accused No. 1-Jayanand resides in front of them.

    (ii) The incident occurred on 01-05-2015 at about 9-00 a.m. On that day, Kishor and his wife heard Sunanda’s hue and cry for help from her house. So, Kishor ran there and saw that accused No. 1-Jayanand was holding an axe in his hand, and Sunanda was lying on the ground. She had sustained head injuries, and blood was oozing from the injuries. Accused No. 2-Niranjan and accused No. 4-Kiran were standing nearby. Accused No. 3-Ashabai was saying accused No. 1-Jayanand to beat up Sunanda. When the informant Kishor asked accused No. 1-Jayanand what he was doing, he told him that Sunanda was practicing black magic on his wife and, therefore, she was having body pain. There is no ‘Barkat’ (prosperity) in their house. Without killing her, there will be no ‘Barkat’ (prosperity). Accused No. 1-Jayanand told him not to intervene; otherwise, he would kill him. Therefore, he came out and proceeded towards the house of Police Patil. On the way, he met Gajanan Jadhav and Bhimrao Dhule. He told them about the incident and went to the house of Police Patil. He narrated the incident to the Police Patil and came to the spot of the incident along with the Police Patil. Sunanda was lying on the ground in an unconscious condition.

    (iii) He called the auto-rickshaw of Ravindra Dhule (PW-6). Then he, along with Sahebrao Paikrao and Mahendra Dhule, took Sunanda to the Hospital at Umarkhed in the auto-rickshaw of Ravindra Dhule, where Doctor advised them to take her to Government Hospital, Nanded. Accordingly, they took her to the Government Hospital, Nanded, where she was declared brought dead.

    (iv) Afterwards, informant Kishor went to the Pofali Police Station and lodged a report regarding the incident. Accordingly, the offence came to be registered vide Crime No. 28/2015 against the accused No. 1 to 4 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The investigation was carried out, and during the investigation, Pandurang Shilar was added as accused No. 5. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the Court against all the accused persons.

    (v) The Charge (Exhibit 17) was framed against all the accused, which was read over and explained to them in the vernacular. To which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused persons was that they were not aware of the incident.

    (vi) The prosecution has examined in all eleven witnesses to prove the charges. Out of them, PW-1/Kishor, PW-6/Ravindra and PW-11/Sarthak are the eyewitnesses. PW-2/Onkar, PW-4/Prakash and PW-7/Ramrao are the panch witnesses on the spot-cum-seizure panchanama, memorandum Statement of accused No. 1-Jayanand and recovery of the axe pursuant to the said statement. PW-3/Subhash and PW-5/Suraj are examined to demonstrate the relationship between the deceased and the accused persons. PW-8/Dr. Pratap Chavhan is the Medical Officer. PW-9/P.I. Sardarsingh and PW-10/A.P.I. Sadashiv Badikar are the Investigating Of

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top