Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Murder Based on Circumstantial Evidence Despite Appellant Absconding During Appeal. Last Seen Theory and Motive Sufficient to Prove Guilt Under Section 302 IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 61
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Yakinali Nasirali Shaikh, was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Akbar Sardar Khan and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane on 23rd November 2011 in Sessions Case No.246 of 2010. The incident occurred on 12th March 2010. The prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence. The appellant was the driver of one Samsunissa Gulam Rasool Patel. The deceased was also a driver. The appellant had an illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased, which provided motive. On the day of the incident, the appellant was last seen with the deceased. The body of the deceased was found with injuries. The appellant absconded after the incident and was arrested later. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant absconded from Central Prison, Kolhapur when released on parole, and a non-bailable warrant was pending. The court examined the evidence of witnesses, including the complainant Nasrin Abdul Ajij Khan (PW2), Rubina Hussain Shaikh (PW3), Nayma Najim Shah Mulla (PW4), and Rehana Sameer Shendule (PW12). The court found that the chain of circumstances was complete and consistent only with the guilt of the appellant. The court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on last seen theory, motive, and absconding - The appellant was convicted for murder of Akbar Sardar Khan. The court held that the chain of circumstances, including the appellant being last seen with the deceased, motive due to illicit relationship, and abscondence, was complete and pointed only to the guilt of the appellant. (Paras 1-20)

B) Criminal Procedure - Absconding - Effect on Appeal - The appellant absconded during pendency of appeal. The court noted that absconding is a relevant circumstance but proceeded to decide the appeal on merits. (Para 2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murder is sustainable on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC upheld.

Law Points

  • Circumstantial evidence
  • last seen theory
  • motive
  • absconding
  • conviction under Section 302 IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (01) 64

Criminal Appeal No.631 of 2012

2022-01-07

Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, Prithviraj K. Chavan

Ms. Ruchi Pawar i/b Mallika A. Ingale (for Appellant), Ms. Veera Shinde, A.P.P (for Respondent No.1-State), Ms. Devyani Kulkarni (Appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2-Victim)

Yakinali Nasirali Shaikh

The State of Maharashtra, Nasren Abdul Aziz Khan, Mumtaz Akbar Khan

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for murder

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted for murder of Akbar Sardar Khan

Previous Decisions

Conviction by Additional Sessions Judge, Thane on 23rd November 2011 in Sessions Case No.246 of 2010

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. State argued that the chain of circumstances was complete and pointed to the appellant's guilt.

Ratio Decidendi

The chain of circumstances, including last seen together, motive due to illicit relationship, and absconding, was complete and consistent only with the guilt of the appellant, warranting conviction under Section 302 IPC.

Judgment Excerpts

By this appeal, the appellant has challenged his conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane on 23rd November, 2011 in Sessions Case No.246 of 2010 for having committed murder of one Akbar Sardar Khan. During pendency of this appeal, the appellant had absconded from Central Prison, Kolhapur when he was released on parole.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane on 23rd November 2011 in Sessions Case No.246 of 2010. He filed Criminal Appeal No.631 of 2012 before the Bombay High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant absconded from prison. The appeal was heard and decided on 7th January 2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Restrains Municipality from Locking and Sealing Premises for Property Tax Arrears of Owner. Tenant Cannot Be Compelled to Pay Owner's Tax Liability; No Statutory Power to Lock and Seal Under Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Partly Allows Appeals in Tenancy Dispute Under Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. High Court's Interference with Revenue Tribunal's Factual Finding Under Article 227 and Tribunal's Reappreciation of Evidence Under Section 76 Hel...