Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 26.02.2001-28.02.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 299 of 1998, whereby the respondents (original accused nos. 1 to 4) were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution alleged that on 27.11.1997 at about 6:00 PM, in front of a paan-beedi shop adjacent to a hardware shop at Adarsh Nagar Chowk, Kurar Village, Malad (East), Mumbai, the respondents intentionally caused the death of Virendra Ramchandra Singh in furtherance of their common intention. The deceased and his brother Jitendra Ramchandra Singh (PW-1) had a long-standing dispute with respondent no. 1 and his father over a room. The Trial Court acquitted the respondents on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove its case against respondent no. 1 in its entirety and beyond reasonable doubt against respondents 2 to 4. The High Court, in appeal, reappreciated the evidence. The key witnesses, PW-1 (brother of deceased) and PW-2 (another eyewitness), turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. No other credible evidence was led to establish the presence of the accused at the scene or their common intention. The court held that the Trial Court's conclusion was based on proper appreciation of evidence and that the State appeal lacked merit. The appeal was dismissed and the acquittal was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Acquittal Appeal - Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - State appeal against acquittal - Prosecution case based on ocular testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 who turned hostile - No other credible evidence to establish presence of accused or common intention - Held that the Trial Court's finding of acquittal is based on proper appreciation of evidence and does not call for interference (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court's acquittal of the respondents for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable in law based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the acquittal of the respondents.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal
- reappreciation of evidence
- hostile witness
- common intention
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (02) 46
Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2001
S.S. Shinde, Milind N. Jadhav
Mr. V.B. Kondedeshmukh (APP for Appellant - State), Mr. M.K. Kocharekar (for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4)
Omprakash @ Munna Aliyar Singh, Sanjay Gopal Pawar, Rakesh @ Babu Sakharam Tejam, Prakash Chhedilal Nagar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal in a murder case
Remedy Sought
The State of Maharashtra sought reversal of the Trial Court's acquittal of the respondents for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.
Filing Reason
The State appealed against the acquittal of the respondents in Sessions Case No. 299 of 1998, claiming that the Trial Court erred in acquitting them despite evidence.
Previous Decisions
The Trial Court (Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay) acquitted the respondents by judgment and order dated 26.02.2001-28.02.2001.
Issues
Whether the Trial Court's acquittal of the respondents for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable in law.
Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Submissions/Arguments
The State argued that the Trial Court erred in acquitting the respondents despite the evidence on record.
The respondents' counsel supported the acquittal, submitting that the prosecution failed to prove its case as the key witnesses turned hostile.
Ratio Decidendi
In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court will not interfere unless the Trial Court's findings are perverse or based on no evidence. Here, the prosecution's key witnesses turned hostile and there was no credible evidence to establish the presence of the accused or their common intention. Hence, the acquittal was upheld.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court of Sessions, Greater Bombay, by judgement and order dated 26.02.2001-28.02.2001 has acquitted Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 (originally Accused Nos. 1 to 4 respectively) of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
According to the Prosecution, Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 intentionally caused the death of one Shri. Virendra Ramchandra Singh in furtherance of their common intention at 6:00 PM on 27.11.1997 in front of a paan-beedi shop...
Procedural History
The Trial Court acquitted the respondents on 26.02.2001-28.02.2001. The State filed Criminal Appeal No. 428 of 2001 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which was reserved on 20.12.2021 and pronounced on 10.02.2022.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 34
