Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Datta Sopan Pawar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir, for the murder of his father-in-law, Mahadu Devnale, under Sections 302, 201, 176, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that on 10 May 2014, the appellant assaulted Mahadu by slapping him, banging his head against a wall, and kicking him, leading to his death. The deceased's wife, Rukhminbai (PW1), and daughter Sangita (PW2) were the primary eyewitnesses. However, during trial, both turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. The medical evidence showed that the deceased had a fracture of the hyoid bone and internal injuries, which were inconsistent with the alleged manner of assault. The appellant argued that the conviction was based on unreliable testimony and that the medical evidence contradicted the ocular version. The High Court, after analyzing the evidence, found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the eyewitnesses had turned hostile, the medical evidence did not support the alleged assault, and there were material contradictions in the prosecution story. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - Benefit of Doubt - Appeal against conviction for murder of father-in-law - Prosecution case based on ocular testimony of wife and daughter - Medical evidence inconsistent with ocular version - Material witnesses turned hostile - Held that conviction cannot be sustained when medical evidence contradicts ocular testimony and prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-20). B) Criminal Law - Hostile Witness - Evidentiary Value - Testimony of hostile witness cannot be relied upon without corroboration - Held that evidence of hostile witness is not completely effaced but requires careful scrutiny and corroboration (Para 15). C) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Inconsistency with Ocular Testimony - When medical evidence contradicts ocular version, court may reject ocular testimony - Held that in the present case, injuries on deceased were not consistent with the alleged assault by banging head on wall (Paras 16-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302, 201, 176, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable in law based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Hostile witness
- Medical evidence inconsistency
- Circumstantial evidence
- Last seen theory
- Motive
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 201 IPC
- Section 176 IPC
- Section 504 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
