Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal by four accused persons against their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 452 IPC for the murder of Sunanda, the widow of their late brother. The incident occurred on 1 May 2015 at about 9:00 a.m. when the informant Kishor (PW1) heard Sunanda's cries and saw accused No.1 Jayanand holding an axe while Sunanda lay on the ground with head injuries. Accused No.2 Niranjan and accused No.4 Kiran were standing nearby, and accused No.3 Ashabai was instigating Jayanand. Kishor stated that Jayanand accused Sunanda of practicing black magic on his wife, causing body pain and lack of prosperity, and declared that killing her was necessary. Kishor then sought help from the Police Patil, and Sunanda was taken to a hospital where she was declared brought dead. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses, including three eyewitnesses: Kishor (PW1), Ravindra (PW6), and Sarthak (PW11). The trial court convicted all four appellants under Sections 302 and 452 IPC, but acquitted them under the Maharashtra Prevention of Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, and acquitted accused No.5 Pandurang. The appellants challenged their conviction under Section 302 IPC, arguing that the eyewitness testimonies were inconsistent and contradictory, that the blood group report was inconclusive, and that material witnesses were not examined. The Additional Public Prosecutor argued that the eyewitnesses consistently deposed about the assault and that the recovery of the axe and blood-stained shirt supported the case. The High Court upheld the conviction, noting that the appellants did not challenge the homicidal death or their conviction under Section 452 IPC, and that the evidence of the eyewitnesses was credible and consistent. The court found that the common intention to commit murder was established, and the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Common Intention - Sections 302, 34, 452 IPC - The appellants were convicted for murder and house-trespass after they entered the deceased's courtyard and assaulted her with an axe, allegedly due to suspicion of black magic. The court upheld the conviction, finding that the eyewitnesses consistently deposed that accused No.1 held the axe and the deceased was lying injured, and the appellants did not challenge the homicidal death. The court also noted that the appellants did not challenge their conviction under Section 452 IPC. (Paras 5-9) B) Evidence Act - Adverse Inference - Non-Examination of Witnesses - The appellants argued that the prosecution failed to examine material witnesses like Pooja, Sahebrao Paikrao, and Mahendra Dhule, but the court did not draw an adverse inference as the eyewitnesses' testimony was sufficient to prove the case. (Para 3) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Conviction - Appeal - The court considered that the appellants had been incarcerated for over nine years and had already served the sentence under Section 452 IPC, but upheld the life sentence under Section 302 IPC. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on the evidence of eyewitnesses and other circumstances.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 452 IPC, confirming the sentences imposed by the trial court.
Law Points
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 452 IPC
- Common Intention
- Eyewitness Testimony
- Motive
- Recovery of Weapon
- Homicidal Death
- Adverse Inference for Non-Examination of Witnesses
