Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sarita Gaonkar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panaji, sitting at Ponda Goa, for an offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year and a fine of ₹10,000. The prosecution case was that on 12th September 2014, between 8.50 hours to 9.55 hours at Nirankal, Ponda, Goa, the appellant requested the complainant (PW8) to take her to Nirankal via Kodar road, and on reaching Kodar, she stabbed the complainant with a sharp knife on his back, attempting to kill him. The appellant then jumped from the scooter and ran away. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses. The appellant, when examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), denied the charge but offered an explanation about the incident. No defence evidence was led. The learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant, leading to the present appeal. The appellant's counsel argued that the conviction was unsustainable because the explanation offered by the appellant under Section 313 CrPC was corroborated by the prosecution evidence, and the defence was established on a preponderance of probability. The counsel pointed out that PW8, the alleged victim, deposed that he did not even realise for some time that he was stabbed, and the doctor who performed the surgery was not examined. The High Court, after hearing both sides, allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant. The court held that the appellant's defence was probable and corroborated by the prosecution's own evidence, and therefore the conviction was not sustainable.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Standard of Proof for Defence - The accused is not required to prove her defence beyond reasonable doubt; it is sufficient if the defence is established on a preponderance of probability. The court held that the explanation offered by the accused under Section 313 CrPC, when corroborated by prosecution evidence, can lead to acquittal. (Paras 5-6) B) Criminal Procedure - Examination of Accused - Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Evidentiary Value - The explanation given by the accused under Section 313 CrPC can be considered as evidence and, if probable, can cast doubt on the prosecution case. The court held that the accused's explanation in this case was corroborated by the testimony of PW8 and other evidence, making the defence probable. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 307 IPC is sustainable when the accused's explanation under Section 313 CrPC is corroborated by prosecution evidence and establishes a probable defence.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The judgment and order dated 19th January 2018/22nd January 2018 in Sessions Case No.59/2015 convicting the appellant for offence under Section 307 IPC is set aside. The appellant is acquitted. Her bail bonds stand discharged.
Law Points
- Preponderance of probability
- Standard of proof for defence
- Section 313 CrPC explanation
- Corroboration of defence by prosecution evidence
