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
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
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
