IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles of intention and knowledge under Section 300 of the IPC to determine the culpability of the appellant-accused for the murder of his stepson.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. Supehia, J.

1. The present Criminal Misc. Application has been filed seeking suspension of sentence. We have already scaled the evidence pointed out by learned advocate Mr.P.V.Patadiya appearing for the applicant-appellant. We are inclined to take up the main Criminal Appeal. The appellant-convict has already completed 8 years, 2 months and 26 days of incarceration as on 29th April 2024.

2. The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th November 2017 passed by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur, in Sessions Case No.53 of 2015.

3. By the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the appellant-accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.2,000=00 and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

4. The case of the prosecution, as per the Charge Exh.20, is that on 2nd June 2015 at around 20:00 hours, the complainant and her son, while they were sitting for begging, the present appellant-accused came over and quarrelled with the complainant and her minor son, and thereafter, he gave two fatal knife blows on the minor step son aged 16 years, and as a result the minor succumbed to the injuries.

5. Learned advocate Mr.Patadiya has submitted that the conviction recorded by the trial Court is required to be disbelieved since the trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its true perspective. At the outset, he has referred to the postmortem report at Exh.28 and has submitted that the injuries do not show that there was any intention on the part of the appellant-accused to commit the murder of his son (i.e. the deceased). He has submitted that the evidence of PW-3, i.e. the complainant, who is examined at Exh.35, cannot be believed since she has not established herself as the witness of a sterling quality. It is submitted that the complainant had all the reasons to implicate the appellant-accused in the offence since prior to the incident also, some altercation had taken place between the complainant and the appellant-accused.

6. Learned advocate Mr.Patadiya has also referred to the evidence of another eye-witness PW-5, i.e. the brother of the deceased, who is examined at Exh.40, and has submitted that his evidence may not be considered as the same suffers from omission and contradiction.

7. Learned advocate Mr.Patadiya has further submitted that the panchas have not supported the discovery panchnama and the FSL report does not, in any manner, connect the appellant- accused with the alleged offence of murder. He has submitted that the neighbour (PW-7 Shamaben Imtiyazbhai Shaikh, who is examined at Exh.42), was present at the scene of offence however, she has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is submitted that the blood, which has been found on the weapon, has remained unidentified. Finally, he has submitted that even if it is presumed that the FSL has found the blood group ‘O’ on the clothes of the appellant-accused, the same is required to be disbelieved since there is no evidence which would show the blood group of accused.

8. Per contra, learned APP has supported the case of the prosecution and has submitted that the trial Court has committed no perversity or illegality in convicting the appellant- accused. It is submitted that the complainant, who is the mother of the deceased and the wife of the accused has totally supported the case of the prosecution and has established herself as a witness of sterling quality. Learned APP has further submitted that there is another eye-witness (PW-5), who is the brother of the deceased and stepson of the accused, examined at Exh.40, who has completely supported the case of the prosecution.

9. While referring to the postmortem report, learned APP has submitted that the injury and the wound found on the deceased would reflect that the minor dec