SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1964

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ILESH J. VORA, P. M. RAVAL, JJ.
Sunil @ Rahul Rajeshbhai Makwana – Appellant 
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent 
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 735 of 2017 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 895 of 2017
Decided on : 18-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711)
For the Respondent: MR L B DABHI APP

Intention to kill is essential for murder conviction; knowledge of likely death suffices for culpable homicide, requiring assessment of overall circumstances and violence nature.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 304(II) - Criminal Appeal against conviction - Org. Accused found guilty of murder under Section 302, sentenced to life imprisonment, but conviction altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(II) - On examining evidences, the court found intent to kill not clearly established, ruling that the injuries inflicted were likely to cause death but lacked sufficient intent for murder as defined in Sections 299 and 300. (Paras 5, 11, 12, 14, 15)

(B) Intention and Knowledge in Culpable Homicide - The court reiterated that intention is a state of mind inferred from facts, and mere words or gestures do not alone prove intent to kill. (Para 12)

Facts of the case:
The appeal arises from proceedings following a violent altercation resulting in the death of Rupesh Pawar, allegedly at the hands of the appellants, who claimed prior provocation. Eyewitnesses provided testimony about the attack, but the defense argued lack of intent to kill.

Findings of Court:
The court found the prosecution had not conclusively proved intent to commit murder but recognized the culpability of the actions, attributing knowledge of likely death.

Issues: Whether the actions constituted murder or culpable homicide, and the interpretation of intent concerning the established injuries.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that gauging intent involves assessing the overall circumstances and the nature of the violence, ruling that the prosecution must demonstrate specific intent for murder.

Result: Conviction altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, sentencing adjusted to reflect time served.

JUDGMENT :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

1. Criminal Appeal No. 735 of 2017 is preferred by the Sunil @ Rahul Rajeshbhai Makwana i.e., Org. Accused No. 1 who has been convicted in Sessions Case No. 364 of 2013 vide judgment and order dated 24.04.2017 passed by the Ld. 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat. Whereas, Criminal Appeal No. 895 of 2017 is preferred by the State of Gujarat against the acquittal of Kirit @ Lalu Sumanbhai Rathod and Deepak Kanubhai Solanki i.e., Org. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 respectively in Sessions Case No. 364 of 2013 vide judgment and order dated 24.04.2017 passed by the Ld. 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat. The Org. Accused namely Sunil @ Rahul Rajeshbhai Makwana has been convicted under the provisions of Section 302 of IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment and is imposed with fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default thereof, one month SI. Since both the Appeals arise from the same Session Case, they are decided together.

2. The facts of the captioned Appeals as can be ascertained from the FIR reveal that:-

2.1 On 27.05.2013, Chandrakant Narayan Pawar (PW-7A) lodged a complaint at Khatodara Police Station, Surat, stating that on 26.05.2013, his son Rupesh Pawar had gone out to play cricket and returned home around 1:30–2:00 PM. After lunch, Rupesh again went out and returned around 7:00–7:30 PM. He later left for Piplod on his motorcycle (GJ 05 GB 2215). Around 10:45 PM, accused No.1, along with accused Nos. 2, 3, and a juvenile, arrived at the complainant’s residence on a two-wheeler. All were known to the complainant as they regularly gathered near his house. Accused No.1, holding a wooden log, stated that Rupesh had beaten him and he wanted to “finish” him. The co-accused also threatened the same. Not finding Rupesh at home, they left. The complainant informed Rupesh over phone, and Rupesh said he was on his way home. Around 11:15 PM, the complainant saw the accused near Choryasi Dairy, where Accused No.1 assaulted Rupesh on the head with a wooden log, while others attacked him with fists. On seeing the complainant, they fled. Rupesh was taken to Amruta Hospital and then Mahavir Trauma Hospital, where he was declared dead. FIR was registered under Sections 323, 302, 188, and 114 IPC.

2.2 After Investigation, the cahrgesheet came to be filed before the concerned Ld. Magistrate, and the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Surat as the case was sessions triable and the same was registered as Sessions Case No. 364/2013. Thereafter charges were framed vide Exh. 9 and the accused denied the charged and prayed for trial.

2.3 The Prosecution has examined the following witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused.

PW No.NameState of WitnessExh.
1Rajubhai Jaynath DavePanch of inquest Panchnama19
2Vishalbhai Mukeshbhai MaisuriPanch of scene of offence21
3Shashikantbhai Shantilal PatelPanch of Discovery Panchnama30
4Piyushsinh Ajitsinh RaowljiEye witness33
5Pujaben Rajendrabhai DubeyEye witness38
6Sarikaben Jagannath PatilEye witness39
7Bhartiben Chandrakant PawarMother of deceased and an eye witness51
7/AChandrakant Narayan PawarComplainant and an Eye witness57
8Dr. Rajdeep SurendraRMO Mahavir Hospital58/A
9Dr Chandresh TailorDoctor who conducted Post Mortem of deceased61
10Bhartiben Mahendrabhai SadhuPolice witness who registered offence.67
11Bharatbhai G DamorIO71
12Chandrakant Keshavlal PatelIO and officer who filled chargesheet.75

2.4 Apart from leading oral evidence as mentioned above, prosecution to bring home the charge has relied upon the following documentary evidences:-

Sr No.ParticularsExh. No
1Inquest Panchnama20
2Panchnama of Scene of Offence.22
3Panchnama of Clothes of deceased after completion of post mortem27
4Panchnama of Physical condition of the accused.28
5Seizure panchnama of “pleasure” model motorcycle used in crime.31
6Complaint58
7Certificate issued by Dr. Piyush Khanna of Mahavir Hospital, Surat as regards primary treatment given to Rupesh Pawar.59
8PM Note63
9Cause of death Certificate64
10Report to register offence and Suchi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top