Back
2017 Supreme(Raj) 2093
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS, MANOJ KUMAR GARG, JJ.
BABU LAL — Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 2010
Decided on : 03-07-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Deepesh Beniwal, Amicus Curiae,
For the Respondent: Mr. C.S. Ojha, Adv.
The court's interpretation of Section 302 IPC and its application to the facts of the case established that the prosecution had proved the offense of murder beyond a reasonable doubt and that the appellant's conduct and behavior indicated his intention to kill his wife.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - CONVICTION FOR MURDER - EVIDENCE - SUFFICIENCY - MOTIVE - INTENTION - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 302 IPC - APPLICATION OF LAW TO FACTS - COURT'S ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Babu Lal, was convicted by the trial court for the murder of his wife, Narayani, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The prosecution alleged that the appellant inflicted fatal injuries on Narayani with an axe due to a domestic dispute. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to prove the offense of murder and that the offense should be reduced to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court upheld the trial court's conviction of the appellant for murder under Section 302 IPC. The court found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, relying on the testimony of eyewitnesses, the medical evidence, and the forensic analysis of the recovered articles. The court held that the appellant's conduct and behavior towards his wife and children, as well as the nature of the injuries inflicted on Narayani, indicated his intention to kill her.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved the offense of murder under Section 302 IPC beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the offense should be reduced to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had proved the offense of murder under Section 302 IPC beyond a reasonable doubt based on the following evidence: - Eyewitness testimony: Multiple eyewitnesses, including the appellant's son and wife, testified that they saw the appellant inflicting injuries on Narayani with an axe. - Medical evidence: The medical evidence established that the injuries inflicted on Narayani were serious and sufficient to cause her death. - Forensic analysis: The forensic analysis of the recovered articles, including the axe and the clothes of the appellant and the deceased, revealed the presence of human blood of the same group as Narayani's. 2. The court rejected the appellant's argument that the offense should be reduced to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC. The court held that the nature of the injuries inflicted on Narayani, coupled with the appellant's conduct and behavior towards his wife and children, indicated his intention to kill her.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the appellant's appeal and upheld the trial court's conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
G.K. Vyas, J.
Instant jail appeal has been filed by the accused appellant Babu lal from Central Jail, Udaipur to challenge the judgment dated 10.02.2010 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (FT) Chittorgarh in Sessions Case No. 65/2008 whereby, the accused appellant was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC and following sentence was passed against him:
Under Section 302 IPC
Life Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months simple imprisonment.
2. As per the brief facts of the case, the complainant Mangi lal Gurjar PW/1 gave submitted a written report Ex.P/1 at Police Station Shambhupura, District Chittorgarh on 15.09.2008 at 10:20 AM in which he stated that today in the morning at 9AM when he was going towards his house from his agricultural field (Bada), at that time he heard hue and cry from the house of his neighbour Ramba Gurjar. He immediately rushed to the house and saw that daughter-in-law of Shri Ramba, Smt. Narayani was lying on floor and blood was oozing from her body and her son Goverdhan was weeping while standing near the body. Goverdhan son of Narayani informed that his father Babu lal Gurjar inflicted injury by axe upon the body of his mother Narayani and due to the serious injury, she died after some time. As per information given by Mangi lal, the appellant Babu lal committed murder of his own wife Narayani by inflicting injuries upon her body by axe. It is apprehended by complainant that some dispute arose between the husband and wife, therefore, the appellant caused injuries upon the body of deceased. It was prayed that action may be taken against him.
3. Upon aforesaid complaint Ex.P/1, FIR No. 158/2008 was registered under Section 302 IPC against the appellant. SHO Police station, Shambhupura conducted investigation and filed charge-sheet against the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh.
4. Learned Magistrate committed the case for trial to the court of Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh but later on transferred to the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge (FT) Chittorgarh for trial. During trial, after providing an opportunity of hearing, charges were framed against the appellant under Section 302 IPC but the appellant denied the charges levelled against him and prayed for trial.
5. In the trial, statements of 27 prosecution witnesses were recorded. After recording statement of prosecution witnesses, statement of accused appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 were recorded and an opportunity was given to explain his defence.
6. During trial, 33 documents were exhibited from prosecution side but no evidence was led by the appellant in his defence inspite of granting an opportunity to lead evidence in defence.
7. Learned trial court after recording evidence granted an opportunity to both the parties to finally argue the case and after hearing final arguments, held the accused appellant guilty for offence under Section 302 IPC and passed sentence of life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months. Instant appeal has been filed by the accused appellant from jail, therefore, Mr. Deepesh Beniwal was appointed as Amicus Curiae to argue the case on his behalf.
8. Learned Amicus Curiae vehemently argued that trial court has committed a grave error while holding the accused appellant guilty for offence under Section 302 IPC in view of the fact that even if entire prosecution evidence is accepted, the offence cannot travel beyond Section 304 Part I IPC.
9. Learned Amicus Curiae further submitted that there is no evidence of motive on record, therefore, it can be said that finding of learned trial court for convicting the accused appellant for offence under Section 302 I
