Back
2026 Supreme(Bom) 253
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
Shivaji Rama Kamble – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through Police Inspector, Police Station Pimpalner, Tq. & Dist. Beed – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1244 of 2019 With Criminal Application No. 475 of 2023
Decided On : 12-03-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide
Act Referred
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE : S.164, S.294, S.313
Headnote
(B) Circumstantial evidence - Five golden principles: circumstances fully established, consistent only with guilt, conclusive, exclude innocent hypotheses, complete chain showing act by accused in human probability - Satisfied where accused present, weapon snatched from hand matching injuries, blood stains on axe/clothes matching group, medical evidence corroborating assault/injuries, hostile witnesses partially reliable with corroboration. Proof beyond reasonable doubt as no emotional/speculative doubt. (Paras 35-58)
Facts of the case:
Accused questioned informant about chewing tobacco, assaulted leg with stick; when scolded, fetched axe, inflicted head blows causing death. Neighbours arrived, snatched axe, tied accused to tree fearing further assaults due to mental fits history. FIR lodged next day; investigation recovered axe/stick/bloodied clothes/soil sent for analysis confirming blood group match.
Findings of Court:
No legal insanity proved; circumstantial links complete excluding innocence; guilt established beyond reasonable doubt; conviction and 10-year rigorous imprisonment with fine proper.
Issues: Whether accused entitled to Section 84 benefit; whether circumstantial evidence proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite hostile witnesses and insanity plea.
Ratio Decidendi: Accused failed to prove legal insanity at offence time despite medical history; prosecution established mens rea via unbroken circumstantial chain - presence, weapon possession/use, matching injuries/blood, post-act flight - unexplainable except by guilt. Result : Appeal dismissed.
For the Appellant :Mr. C. V. Thombre, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mrs. A. S. Deshmukh, APP
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal challenges 304-i conviction on circumstantial evidence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 2. legal insanity under section 84 not proved. (Para 8 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 3. witness testimonies partially corroborate incident despite hostility. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. circumstantial evidence requires complete unbroken chain. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 5. circumstances prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 6. appeal dismissed; conviction under 304-i upheld. (Para 59 , 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
1. Heard Mr Thombre, learned Advocate (appointed) for the appellant and the learned APP for the respondent/State.
2. Challenge in this appeal to the judgment dated 03-01-2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed in Sessions Case No. 89/2016 by which the accused was convicted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [in short ‘IPC’] and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default, the accused was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days.
3. In short, it is the case of the prosecution that on 30-04- 2016, when the informant/PW-1, who was the father of the accused, was sitting in front of his house, the accused questioned him as to why he was chewing tobacco and assaulted him by stick on the leg. At which time, mother-in-law of PW-1/grand mother of the accused scolded the accused and then accused brought the axe from the house and assaulted the grand-mother on the head due to which she fell in pool of the blood.
4. This incident led to the initiation of criminal proceedings, but not to the immediate registration of the First Information Report. It was PW-8-Gajanan, API attached to the Pimpalner Police Station, who was on patrolling duty that day. He received a phone call from the Pimpalner Police Station that a murder had taken place at Ghodka Rajuri. Therefore, he took the station diary entry upon arriving at the police station and went to the spot. At the scene, he found a crowd gathered in front of the house and learned that it belonged to PW-1. He then informed his superior.
5. PW-8 on the spot found the corpus of a female, and thereafter he prepared an inquest panchanama, which was proved below Exh. 21. The corpus was forwarded for postmortem to the Civil Hospital, Beed and even a letter to that effect was issued, which was below Exh. 20.
6. Finally, as per the case of the prosecution on 01-05- 2016, PW-1 came to the police station and lodged the first information report. His complaint was below Exh. 63. The lodgment of the complaint resulted in the arrest of the accused on 01-05-2016, and the arrest panchanama was proved below Exh. 66 by PW-8.
7. The investigation was carried out, clothes were seized, witness statements recorded, and the stained clothes and the axe were forwarded for chemical examination. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and, since the trial court found a prima facie case, the charge was framed against the accused below Exh. 12/C on 27-03-2017 for commission of offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC.
8. The record of the case shows that on 31-01-2017 the learned Sessions Judge, Beed, ordered the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Beed to comply with the order dated 04-01-2017 which was for referring the accused for medical examination. By order dated 31- 01-2017, it was further directed that the Superintendent of District Prison, Beed,to produce the accused before the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Beed, with prior appointment. On 10-03-2017, the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed had observed that the accused No. 1 had complaints of unsoundness of mind since long. The Civil Surgeon had filed a certificate dated 13-02-2017, which shows that the accused was examined by th
