Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH
URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, NANDESH S.DESHPANDE
Ku. Panchashila Uttam Thorat – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
( PER : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE , J.)
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of sentence passed by the II Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Sessions Trial No. 98/2004 dated 21.12.2005 convicting the present Appellant/accused of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short “IPC”) and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for life.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case emerges from the Police papers and recorded evidence are as under:
2(i). The First Information Report (for short “FIR”) came to be registered on the basis of the report lodged by the accused on the contention that she has committed murder of deceased Madhao Gote at her house near Railway Station Slum area as deceased on 22.06.2004 was insisting her to withdraw the criminal case pending against him under Section 376 of IPC in Washim Court instituted on her report. She contended that, the deceased was harassing her and insisting her continuously to withdraw the report filed by her and on the fateful night also he came to her house and was insisting her to withdraw the complaint, therefore she gave a blow of Razor (Ustara) on his neck and by givi
The court held that acts committed under grave and sudden provocation may reduce the charge from murder to culpable homicide, emphasizing the absence of malicious intent.
The court relied on circumstantial evidence, the credibility of witnesses, and the nature of the injuries to establish the guilt of the accused under IPC 302.
In order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the gui....
(1) Statement contained in FIR furnished by one of accused in the case cannot, in any manner, be used against another accused.(2) Doctor is not a witness of fact – A doctor is examined by prosecution....
Murder conviction upheld on circumstantial evidence via complete chain: homicidal death, last seen together, false explanation, body concealment, corroborated confessions, medical proof of fatal inju....
The conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was upheld based on circumstantial evidence demonstrating a complete and unbroken chain leading to the appellant's guilt.
The court affirmed that evidence must establish intention to commit murder, ruling that provocation claimed by the accused did not mitigate the crime, reaffirming conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The court ruled that a confession made to a police officer is inadmissible as evidence, and the conviction for murder was reduced to culpable homicide due to lack of premeditation.
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
