"Acquittal in Common Intention: Nagpur Bench Revisits Section 34 IPC in Murder Case" "Clarifying liability under Section 34 IPC while affirming individual accountability under Section 302 IPC."


Summary of Judgement

Case Background

The appellants, family members (Jayanand, Niranjan, Ashabai, and Kiran Dhabale), were convicted under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 452 IPC for killing Sunanda, accused of practicing black magic. The primary accused, Jayanand, used an axe to assault the victim.

Incident Details (Para 2)

  • Time and Place: Incident occurred on May 1, 2015, around 9:00 AM at Sunanda's residence.
  • Key Act: Jayanand assaulted Sunanda with an axe, accusing her of practicing black magic.
  • Witness Testimony: Informant Kishor (PW1) observed the attack and reported it.

Prosecution’s Evidence (Para 6-12)

  • Eyewitnesses: PW1-Kishor, PW6-Ravindra, and PW11-Sarthak testified.
  • Medical Findings: PW8-Dr. Pratap confirmed multiple injuries consistent with an axe attack.
  • Recovery Evidence: Axe with blood stains was recovered from Jayanand; clothes were seized with human blood.

Defense Claims (Para 3)

  • Testimonies were inconsistent and omitted details.
  • Key witnesses like Sahebrao and Mahendra were not examined.

Court Observations

  1. Homicidal Death Proven (Para 8): Medical evidence confirmed the cause of death as chop injuries.
  2. Section 34 IPC Misapplied (Para 27-37): No sufficient evidence of prior meeting of minds or shared intent among appellants 2-4.

Acts and Sections Discussed

  1. Indian Penal Code (IPC)
    • Section 302: Punishment for Murder.
    • Section 34: Acts done in furtherance of common intention.
    • Section 452: House-trespass with preparation for assault.
  2. Indian Evidence Act
    • Section 27: Admissibility of confessions leading to discoveries.

Legal Ratio:

  1. Individual Accountability vs. Common Intention: While Jayanand’s intent and actions were clearly established under Section 302 IPC, no evidence proved the involvement of other appellants in a shared plan or intention to murder.
  2. Burden of Proof for Section 34 IPC: Prosecution failed to establish a prearranged plan or active participation of accused Nos. 2-4, leading to their acquittal under this provision. Mere presence or utterances like “ekjk ekjk” (beat her) do not suffice to prove shared criminal intent.

Final Order:

  • Jayanand: Conviction under Section 302 IPC upheld.
  • Niranjan, Ashabai, and Kiran: Acquitted of charges under Section 302 r/w Section 34 IPC.
  • Section 452 IPC Conviction: Maintained for all appellants, already served.

Subjects:

  • Subject: Criminal Law – Murder, Common Intention.
  • Tags: IPC Section 34, Evidence, Black Magic, Homicidal Death, Nagpur High Court, Criminal Appeal.

The Judgement

Case Title: Jayanand s/o Arjun Dhabale & Ors. Versus The State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2024 LawText (BOM) (11) 133

Case Number: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 263 OF 2021

Date of Decision: 2024-11-13