Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 302, 326, 396 read with 34 IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 142
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10th December 2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati in Sessions Case No. 85 of 1998, acquitting the respondents (original accused) for offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 396 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that on 18th May 1998, the informant Rama Dinkar Dhumal had gone to his mother's house at Dhumal Vasti, Gopalwadi, to fetch her for a marriage ceremony. He left her there and returned. The next morning, the father-in-law of informant's brother discovered that Manik, Baban, and Kamal were lying dead, and Savitribai and Jaya were injured. The informant rushed to the spot and found the deceased with injuries. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to produce credible evidence and could not prove motive. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the trial court's view was plausible and not perverse. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Acquittal - Appeal against acquittal - Sections 302, 326, 396 read with 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - State appeal against acquittal of accused for murder and robbery - Trial court acquitted accused on ground of lack of credible evidence and failure to prove motive - High Court held that the view taken by trial court was plausible and not perverse, hence no interference warranted - Held that prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-15).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court is perverse and liable to be set aside.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court is upheld.

Law Points

  • Acquittal upheld
  • lack of credible evidence
  • failure to prove motive
  • benefit of doubt
  • no interference with acquittal unless perverse
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (BOM) (12) 53

Criminal Appeal No. 243 of 2002

2020-12-03

Prasanna B. Varale, V. G. Bisht

Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the Appellant - State. None for the Respondents.

State of Maharashtra through the Daund Police Station for Rama Dinkar Dhumal

Sanglya Chunya Pawar, Jakyee @ Jakya Sanglya Pawar, Kirlya Bakad Bhosale

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against acquittal

Remedy Sought

State sought setting aside of acquittal and conviction of respondents

Filing Reason

State challenged the acquittal of respondents for offences under Sections 302, 326, 396 read with 34 IPC

Previous Decisions

Trial court acquitted the accused on 10th December 2001 in Sessions Case No. 85 of 1998

Issues

Whether the judgment of acquittal is perverse and liable to be set aside?

Submissions/Arguments

The learned APP submitted that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence. The respondents did not appear or contest the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the trial court's view was plausible and not perverse, and the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, no interference with the acquittal is warranted.

Judgment Excerpts

This appeal is filed by the State challenging judgment and order of acquittal dated 10th December, 2001 passed in Sessions Case No. 85 of 1998 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 396 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Procedural History

The trial court acquitted the accused on 10th December 2001. The State filed the present appeal on 2002. The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 3rd December 2020.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 326, 396, 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Insurance Company's Appeal and Partly Allows Claimants' Appeal in Motor Accident Claim Case — Negligence of Truck Driver Established, Contributory Negligence Not Proved. Claimants awarded enhanced compensation with 6% inter...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Absence of Prima Facie Case Under Sections 448, 504, 324, 323, 506 IPC — Dispute Found to be Civil in Nature with False Allegations of Criminal Trespass and Assault.