Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mahendra Kumar @ Lala Duvari Kewat, was a rickshaw driver. On 27.10.2010 at about 7.00 p.m., the deceased Police Hawaldar Anil Aitewadekar, who was on traffic duty, issued a challan to the appellant for a traffic violation and for not having requisite documents. The appellant became enraged and returned to the spot in front of Hotel Rishikesh at Vasai. He poured petrol from a plastic bucket on the deceased and also threw a shirt soaked with petrol on him, then set him on fire by lighting a matchstick. The deceased suffered 39% burn injuries and died on 3.11.2010 due to shock from burns. The appellant was arrested and a test identification parade was held on 18.11.2010. The prosecution examined fourteen witnesses, including eye witnesses and PW-8 who recorded the dying declaration. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 302, 333, and 353 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and other terms. The appellant appealed to the High Court challenging the conviction. The High Court, after considering the evidence, found the dying declaration credible and corroborated by other evidence, and upheld the conviction. The court held that the appellant's act of setting the deceased on fire after being issued a challan constituted murder and also offences against a public servant. The appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Dying Declaration - The deceased police constable was set on fire by the appellant after being issued a traffic challan - The dying declaration recorded by PW-8 was found credible and corroborated by other evidence - Held that the conviction under Section 302 IPC was justified (Paras 1-3). B) Criminal Law - Offences Against Public Servant - Sections 333 and 353 IPC - Voluntarily causing grievous hurt to deter public servant from duty - The appellant poured petrol and set the deceased on fire while he was on duty - Held that the offences under Sections 333 and 353 IPC were made out (Paras 1-2). C) Evidence - Test Identification Parade - The appellant was identified by witnesses in the TI parade held on 18.11.2010 - The identification was relied upon by the prosecution - Held that the TI parade was properly conducted (Para 2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302, 333, and 353 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentences under Sections 302, 333, and 353 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Murder
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 333 IPC
- Section 353 IPC
- Dying declaration
- Test identification parade
- Circumstantial evidence
- Motive
