Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Babu Bhairu Ovhal (Accused No.1) and Sonu Bhairu Ovhal (Accused No.2), were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 192 of 1993. Accused No.1 was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder, and Accused No.2 was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The incident occurred on 4th September 1992 in Village Punawale, where a dispute arose after Accused No.1 urinated near a water fountain set up for a Ganesh festival. Deceased Ramesh Dhavale pushed Accused No.1 away. Later, when Ramesh and witness Vishnu Kate were passing by, Accused No.1 and Accused No.2 approached. Accused No.2 caught hold of Ramesh's hands from behind, and Accused No.1 stabbed him twice with a knife, once on the left arm and once on the abdomen, causing his intestines to protrude. Ramesh died from the injuries. The prosecution examined eyewitnesses including Vishnu Kate (PW-5), Somnath Dharmalkar (PW-6), and Anil Bandal (PW-7), whose testimonies were consistent and corroborated by medical evidence. The trial court convicted both accused. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the eyewitnesses were credible and their accounts were reliable. The court held that Accused No.1's act of stabbing the deceased on the abdomen with a knife was intended to cause death, and thus his conviction under Section 302 IPC was correct. Regarding Accused No.2, the court noted that his role was limited to catching hold of the deceased's hands, and there was no evidence of a common intention to murder. However, he had knowledge that his act could facilitate the assault and cause death, so his conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC was upheld. The court dismissed the appeal of Accused No.1 and dismissed the appeal of Accused No.2, confirming their sentences.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Conviction upheld - Accused No.1 gave two knife blows, one on abdomen causing death - Evidence of eyewitnesses credible and corroborated by medical evidence - Held that the act of accused No.1 falls within the ambit of murder under Section 300 IPC and is punishable under Section 302 IPC (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Accused No.2 caught hold of deceased's hands - No common intention to cause death - Knowledge that such act may cause death but no intention - Conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC upheld (Paras 11-15). C) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - Not applicable - Accused No.2's role was limited to catching hold of hands, no shared intention to murder - Held that Section 34 IPC cannot be invoked against accused No.2 for the act of accused No.1 (Paras 16-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 and 304 Part II IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeals of both appellants, confirming their convictions and sentences. Accused No.1's conviction under Section 302 IPC and Accused No.2's conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC were upheld.
Law Points
- Common intention
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Section 324 IPC
- Appreciation of evidence
- Credibility of witnesses
- Medical evidence
- Motive
- Circumstantial evidence
