Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Credible Witnesses. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for killing a 9-month-old child set aside as sole eyewitness testimony found unreliable and medical evidence inconclusive.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Pawa Ashok Malche, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner, for the murder of a 9-month-old child, Komal, under Section 302 IPC, and for causing hurt and criminal intimidation under Sections 323 and 506 IPC. The prosecution case was that the appellant, who was in a relationship with the child's mother, PW-3 Alkabai, had developed hatred for the child and on 17.10.2012, while Alkabai was preparing a swing outside, the appellant took the child and threw her on a cement koba, causing fatal injuries. The trial court relied primarily on the testimony of Alkabai, the sole eyewitness. The High Court, on appeal, found that Alkabai's testimony was riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies, and that the medical evidence did not corroborate the manner of assault alleged. The court noted that the prosecution failed to examine independent witnesses and that the circumstances did not conclusively point to the appellant's guilt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Appreciation of Evidence - Conviction based on sole eyewitness testimony - Held that the testimony of PW-3 (Alkabai) was inconsistent, contradictory, and unreliable, and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case, leading to acquittal (Paras 1-20).

B) Criminal Law - Hurt and Criminal Intimidation - Sections 323 and 506 IPC - Conviction set aside - Held that the allegations of assault and threat were not proved beyond reasonable doubt due to lack of corroboration and inconsistencies (Paras 1-20).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.

Law Points

  • Appreciation of evidence
  • Credibility of witnesses
  • Circumstantial evidence
  • Benefit of doubt
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (04) 1

Criminal Appeal No.174 of 2016

2023-04-24

Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, Y.G. Khobragade

Mr. R.K. Ashtekar (appointed) for appellant, Mr. S.J. Salgare, APP for respondent

Pawa Ashok Malche

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for murder, hurt, and criminal intimidation.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal from conviction under Sections 302, 323, and 506 IPC.

Filing Reason

Appellant challenged his conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner, in Sessions Case No.65/2012.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant on 16.06.2015 under Sections 302, 323, and 506 IPC.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence of sole eyewitness PW-3 Alkabai. Whether the conviction under Sections 323 and 506 IPC is sustainable.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the testimony of PW-3 was unreliable. Respondent argued that the trial court correctly appreciated the evidence and convicted the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The testimony of the sole eyewitness was inconsistent and unreliable, and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt.

Judgment Excerpts

Present appeal has been filed by the original accused challenging his conviction in Sessions Case No.65/2012 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon on 16.06.2015, thereby holding him guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amalner on 16.06.2015. He filed the present appeal before the Bombay High Court, which was heard and decided on 24.04.2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 323, 506
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Credible Witnesses. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for killing a 9-month-old child set aside as sole eyewitness testimony found unreliable and medical evidenc...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Land Acquisition Notifications for Road Construction Due to Non-Compliance with Section 5A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Failure to Provide Personal Hearing to Objector Renders Acquisition Proceedings Invalid.