Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ramesh Tarachand Dhelwan, was convicted by the III Ad-hoc Additional District & Sessions Judge, Pune, for the murder of his wife Vimal under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2,000. The incident occurred on 14.9.2001 when the appellant asked his wife to prepare breakfast, and upon her refusal, a quarrel ensued. The appellant picked up a smashing stone (patta) and assaulted her on the head. Their seven-year-old daughter Rohini (P.W.1) witnessed the incident and shouted for help. Neighbors Kailas (P.W.2), Rakesh (P.W.3), and Geeta (P.W.8) rushed to the scene and found Vimal lying in a pool of blood. The appellant confessed to them that he had assaulted his wife because she refused to make breakfast. Vimal was taken to Sasoon Hospital, where she later died. The police registered an offence under Section 307 IPC initially, which was later converted to Section 302 IPC upon her death. The appellant was arrested, and his clothes were seized. The trial court convicted him based on the testimony of the child witness, the extra-judicial confession, and medical evidence. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence and found the child witness competent and her testimony credible, corroborated by the extra-judicial confession and medical evidence. The court held that the extra-judicial confession was voluntary and true. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on child witness and extra-judicial confession - The appellant was convicted for murdering his wife by assaulting her with a stone after she refused to prepare breakfast. The court relied on the testimony of the seven-year-old daughter (P.W.1) who witnessed the incident, and the extra-judicial confession made by the appellant to neighbors (P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.8). The court held that the child witness was competent and her testimony was corroborated by other evidence. The extra-judicial confession was voluntary and credible. The conviction was upheld. (Paras 2-10) B) Evidence Law - Child Witness - Competency and Credibility - The court examined the testimony of the seven-year-old daughter (P.W.1) and found her to be a competent witness under the Evidence Act. Her evidence was consistent and corroborated by medical evidence and other witnesses. The court held that there is no legal bar to convict on the sole testimony of a child witness if it is reliable. (Paras 5-7) C) Evidence Law - Extra-judicial Confession - Admissibility and Weight - The appellant made an oral confession to neighbors (P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.8) immediately after the incident, stating that he assaulted his wife because she refused to make breakfast. The court held that such extra-judicial confession, if voluntary and true, can form the basis of conviction. The confession was corroborated by the child witness and medical evidence. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife is sustainable based on the evidence of child witness, extra-judicial confession, and other circumstantial evidence.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC are confirmed.
Law Points
- Murder
- Section 302 IPC
- Circumstantial Evidence
- Extra-judicial Confession
- Child Witness
- Credibility of Witnesses
