Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Arunkumar @ Kallu Rajendraprasad Pande, Ashok @ Guddu Rajendraprasad Pande, and Santosh @ Lallu Rajendraprasad Pande, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, for the murder of Laik Khan and for causing hurt to another person. The prosecution case was that on April 4, 2003, the accused, who were also hawkers of bakery products, had a quarrel with the informant Jahid Khan (PW2) and his brother-in-law Zulfikar Khan (PW3) over selling territory. The accused threatened them and later that evening, when Jahid went to the police station, he saw the accused attacking his brother Laik Khan. Laik Khan died from stab wounds. The trial court convicted all three accused under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment, and also convicted accused No.2 under Section 324 IPC. The appellants challenged the conviction in the High Court. The High Court, after examining the evidence, including motive, last seen evidence, recovery of weapons, and extra-judicial confession, held that the chain of circumstances was complete and the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that the accused shared common intention to commit murder and that the conviction under Section 324 IPC was also proper. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence were confirmed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 302, 34 IPC - The court examined whether the chain of circumstances was complete to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt - The prosecution relied on motive, last seen evidence, recovery of weapons, and extra-judicial confession - Held that the circumstances were sufficient to convict the accused (Paras 2-30). B) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - The court considered whether the accused shared common intention to commit murder - The presence of all accused at the scene and their concerted action indicated common intention - Held that Section 34 IPC was rightly applied (Paras 15-20). C) Criminal Law - Hurt - Section 324 IPC - Accused No.2 was convicted for voluntarily causing hurt by a dangerous weapon - The evidence showed that accused No.2 caused injuries to the victim with a knife - Held that the conviction under Section 324 IPC was proper (Paras 21-25).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC and Section 324 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are confirmed.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- motive
- common intention
- Section 302 r/w 34 IPC
- Section 324 IPC
- Section 235(2) CrPC
