Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
G. A. SANAP, J
Mahadeo Pundlikrao Khandalkar - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 692 OF 2008
Decided On : 17-01-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304, Part II - Conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Appellant convicted and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, later modified to 6 years - Evidence from child witness deemed credible despite minor contradictions - Medical evidence corroborated the cause of death as a result of injuries inflicted by the appellant. (Paras 1, 20, 30)
(B) Child Witness - Testimony of child witness upheld as credible and trustworthy despite claims of tutoring - Evidence corroborated by other witnesses and medical reports. (Paras 14, 19)
(C) Homicidal Death - Court found that the appellant's actions were likely to cause death, thus falling under Section 304, Part II - The nature of injuries indicated intent to cause harm. (Paras 20, 26)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the death of his wife, Archana, who sustained multiple injuries due to physical assault by the appellant, leading to her death. The incident occurred on 10.11.2007, following a history of domestic violence.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction based on credible witness testimony and medical evidence linking the appellant to the crime.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the child witness and the nature of the appellant's intent during the incident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence presented was sufficient to establish the appellant's culpability under Section 304, Part II, as the injuries inflicted were likely to cause death.
Result: Criminal Appeal dismissed; conviction maintained with modified sentence of 6 years.
JUDGMENT :
1 In this appeal, challenge is to the judgment and order dated 12.09.2008 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, whereby the learned Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 304, part II of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the I.P.C.’) and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month.
2. Pandurang Aglave, PW-2, is the informant. The case of the prosecution, which can be unfolded from his report and other materials, is that the deceased Archana was his elder daughter. Her marriage with one Deepak was solemnized in the year 1994. From the said Deepak, Archana had a daughter by name Darshana and son Devesh. After dissolution of the marriage of Archana with Deepak, her second marriage was solemnized with the appellant/accused. Archana and her two children were residing with the appellant at Amravati.
3. The incident in question occurred on 10.11.2007. The appellant suspected the fidelity of Archana and on that count, she was ill-treated by the appellant. On 10.11.2007, the informant received a message from Daryapur Police Station that Archana was critically ill and she was admitted in General Hospital, Amravati. The informant reached the hospital at about 7.00 p.m. He came to know that Archana had died. The informant met his grand children Darshana and Devesh. The informant came to know from the children of the deceased about occurrence of the incident of merciless beating of their mother by the appellant. The informant learnt that the appellant beat the deceased by means of a rolling pin (belan) and a leather belt as he suspected her character. On account of the merciless beating by the appellant, the deceased became unconscious. The children further informed PW-2 that thereafter the appellant latched the door of the house from outside. The children raised the hue and cry as the deceased did not regain consciousness, despite their efforts to wake her up. The daughter of the landlord Ku. Amruta Pinjarkar @ Sonu (PW-3), heard the cries of the children and opened the door of the house. Thereafter, the information of the occurrence of the incident was given to the police by dialing number 100. The police arrived at the spot and carried the deceased Archana to General Hospital, Amravati. However, the doctor declared her dead. The informant, on the basis of the disclosure of the incident by children, went to the police station and lodged the report against the appellant. The crime bearing No. 129/2008 was registered against the appellant.
4. On the basis of the said report Digambar Atram (PW-6) conducted the investigation. He went to the spot and drew the spot panchanama. PW-6 seized the blood stain clothes and other incriminating articles from the spot. He forwarded the dead body for postmortem examination. PW-6 recorded the statements of the witnesses. He arrested the appellant. Leather belt was seized under seizure memo. The rolling pin (belan) was recovered pursuant to the discovery statement made by the appellant. Seized articles and blood samples had been sent for chemical analysis. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant.
5. Learned Judge framed the charge against the appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty. The defence of the appellant is of denial and false implication. It was his specific defence that on the date of the incident, on account of the infidelity of the deceased, he slapped her twice or thrice as he lost the power of self control. He did not assault her by means of a rolling pin and leather belt. The prosecution, in order to bring home the guilt of the appellant, examined six witnesses. Learned Judge, on consideration of the evidence, acquitted the appellant of the charge under section 302 of the I.P.C. and held him guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 Part II of t
The court upheld the conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304, Part II, based on credible witness testimony and corroborating medical evidence.
Intention in culpable homicide is inferred from the nature of the weapon used, the location of injuries, and conduct indicating a purposeful act to achieve a harmful outcome.
Point of law: When the doubt arises in the evidence of prosecution, the benefit of doubt always accrues in favour of the accused alone. But in the instant case, the trial Court did not appreciate the....
The prosecution failed to establish the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistent testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain conclusively proving guilt; failure to provide plausible explanations by the accused strengthens the case for conviction.
The judgment established that culpable homicide can be classified as not amounting to murder when committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, without premeditation, as outlined in Excep....
The importance of proving the contents of a panchnama and the circumstances indicating intention to cause death, as outlined in the judgment of Pulicherla Nagaraju @ Nagaraja Reddy vs State of A.P.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the intention to cause death is a crucial factor in determining whether an act amounts to murder under Section 302 of the IPC or culpable h....
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....
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
