SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BELA M.TRIVEDI, DIPANKAR DATTA, JJ.
S.K. Khaja - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1183 of 2011
Decided On : 23-08-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's criminal charges and conviction details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding injury severity and past offenses. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's reasoning on intent and judgment validity. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. dismissal of the appeal and order to surrender. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
1. The appellant/accused - S.K.Khaja has preferred the present appeal challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 07.01.2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No.162 of 1999, whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and order of conviction dated 31.03.1999 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case No.183 of 1996. The Trial Court had convicted the appellant- accused for the offence under Sections 307 and 332 of IPC and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and two years for the said offences respectively.
2. The complainant - Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2), Police Head Constable, was attached to Police Station Itwara, Nanded, in 1995. As per the case of the prosecution, Kamalbai Gupta (PW6) and ten other people from Vinkar Colony, Nanded, had made a complaint to the Police Station Nanded against the present appellant - S.K.Khaja alleging that the appellant/accused was demanding ransom and threatening the public at large. The Police Station In-charge - Surendra Mandhan, Police Inspector (PW7) therefore, ordered the police head constable - Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) to get the custody of accused/appellant in the Police Station for enquiry in connection with the complaint.
3. On 10.03.1995, upon receiving the information about the whereabouts of the appellant - accused, the said Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) along with his colleagues, i.e., other police staff, went in search of the accused. On that day, however, the accused was not found. Thereafter, on 11.03.1995 at about 08.00 P.M., the Head constable - Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) and other police staff on receiving the information that the accused - S.K.Khaja was present in the Ram Rahim Nagar, Nanded, they went to Ram Rahim Nagar, Nanded in order to get custody of the accused. On reaching at the spot, i.e., Ram Rahim Nagar, Nanded, the appellant/accused was seen running from the spot and entering into a Masjid at Madina Nagar, Nanded. Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) and his team therefore chased the accused and entered into the Masjid at Madina Nagar to catch hold of him. When the said Mohammad Khan Pathan was trying to catch and get hold of the accused, he tried to assault Mohammad Pathan on his head by a Gupti. However, Mohammad Khan Pathan while avoiding the blow on his head, got injury on his right shoulder. Thereafter, the other police constables and staff caught hold of the appellant/accused and the police constable - Suresh Jakkawad (PW5) snatched Gupti from him. The appellant/accused was brought to the Police Station. The Head constable Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) lodged the complaint, which was registered as Crime No.45 of 1995 at Police Station, Itwara, Nanded for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 307 and 332 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short "IPC") and under Section 135 of BOMBAY POLICE ACT , 1951.
4. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the trial was conducted against the appellant/accused - S.K.Khaja, in which he was convicted and sentenced as stated hereinabove. The said judgment and order of Trial Court was confirmed by the High Court vide impugned judgment and order.
5. Mr.Sudhanshu S.Choudhari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that even if the case of the prosecution was held to be proved against the appellant in toto, the injuries suffered by the complainant - Mohammad Khan Pathan (PW2) were very simple in nature and would not attract offence under Section 307 of the IPC. According to him, the incident is very old, and the appellant/accused - S.K.Khaja has a l
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of evidence and medical reports to determine the intention of the accused, leading to the conversion of the conviction and the....
The court emphasized the standard for framing charges, allowing for a prima facie case based on the evidence without requiring a full trial.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the successful proof of the charge against the appellants under Sections 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as the application of the Probati....
The conviction under Section 307 IPC was overturned due to lack of intention to cause death, while convictions under Sections 323, 324, and 341 IPC were upheld.
The presence and common intention among co-accused must be substantiated beyond reasonable doubt to uphold convictions under IPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.