Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ku. Sharda Gedam, was charged with murder under Section 302 IPC for the death of her real brother, Raju Sitaram Gedam, a Police Constable. The Sessions Court convicted her under Section 304 Part I IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and sentenced her to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000. The appellant appealed against the conviction and sentence. The High Court noted that the three eye-witnesses (mother, sister PW3 Vanita, and mother's sister) turned hostile and supported the accused. However, the court found that the First Information Report lodged by PW3 Vanita and other circumstantial evidence supported the prosecution case. The court held that the act was done with knowledge that it was likely to cause death but without intention to cause death, thus falling under Section 304 Part I. The court upheld the conviction and sentence, finding no grounds for interference.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder - Section 304 Part I Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction for causing death of brother - Eye-witnesses turned hostile - Court relied on circumstantial evidence and initial version - Held that conviction under Section 304 Part I is sustainable as the act was done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without intention to cause death (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC is sustainable and whether the sentence is appropriate.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000 upheld.
Law Points
- Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder
- Section 304 Part I IPC
- Hostile witness
- Circumstantial evidence
- Sentence reduction
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (06) 163
Criminal Appeal No.232 of 2010
Mr. M.A. Bapat for appellant, Mr. S.S. Doifode, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
Ku. Sharda daughter of Sitaram Gedam
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder/culpable homicide
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought acquittal or reduction of sentence
Filing Reason
Appellant convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC for causing death of her brother
Previous Decisions
Sessions Court convicted appellant under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentenced to 10 years RI and fine
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC is sustainable on the basis of evidence including hostile witnesses
Whether the sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment is appropriate
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that eye-witnesses turned hostile and there was no evidence to support conviction
Respondent argued that the FIR and circumstantial evidence supported the conviction
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC is sustainable as the act was done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without intention to cause death, and the evidence including the FIR and hostile witnesses supports the prosecution case.
Judgment Excerpts
The appellant was charged for offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for committing murder of her real brother - Raju Sitaram Gedam, who was a Police Constable.
The appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 304 (I) of Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.1,000/-
Procedural History
The appellant was charged under Section 302 IPC, convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC by the Sessions Court, and appealed to the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 304 (I)
