Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a family land dispute between the Gholap family. The complainant and accused Nos. 1 and 2 are from the same original Gholap family. On the day of the incident, accused Nos. 1 and 2, along with others, allegedly attacked the deceased and the complainant with weapons, resulting in the death of one person and injuries to the complainant. The trial court convicted accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment and 7 years RI respectively, and also convicted accused No. 6 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused Nos. 3, 4, and 5 were acquitted. The State appealed against the acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6, while the convicted accused appealed against their convictions. The High Court, after hearing all appeals together, upheld the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2, finding the eyewitness testimony and medical evidence credible. However, it dismissed the State's appeal against the acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6, holding that the prosecution failed to prove their involvement beyond reasonable doubt. The court also considered the appeals of accused No. 2 and accused No. 6, but the judgment primarily focuses on the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the acquittal of the others.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder and Attempt to Murder - Common Intention - Sections 302, 307, 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 for murder and attempt to murder based on eyewitness testimony and medical evidence - Held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused Nos. 1 and 2 shared common intention to kill the deceased and injure the complainant (Paras 1-10).
B) Criminal Law - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - Sections 302, 307, 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6 for lack of evidence of common object or participation - Held that the prosecution failed to prove their involvement beyond reasonable doubt, and the trial court's acquittal was proper (Paras 11-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable, and whether the acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6 is justified.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeals of accused Nos. 1, 2, and 6, upholding their convictions. It also dismissed the State's appeal against the acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6, confirming their acquittal.
Law Points
- Common intention under Section 34 IPC
- Acquittal based on benefit of doubt
- Appreciation of evidence in criminal appeals
- Conviction under Section 302 IPC for murder
- Conviction under Section 307 IPC for attempt to murder
Case Details
Criminal Appeal No. 626 of 2001 with Criminal Appeal No. 540 of 2007, Criminal Appeal No. 517 of 2001, Criminal Appeal No. 567 of 2001
B. H. Marlapalle, U. D. Salvi
Dr. F.R. Shaikh (APP for State), Mr. Abhaykumar Apte (for appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 540/07), Mr. S. S. Kulkarni (for appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 517/01 and respondent no.4 in Cri. Appeal No. 626/01), Mr. K. S. Patil (for appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 567/01), Mr. S.V. Kotwal i/by Mr. M. S. Mohite (for respondent nos.1 and 2 in Cri. Appeal No. 626/01)
State of Maharashtra (in Cri. Appeal No. 626/2001); Maruti Ramchandra Gholap (in Cri. Appeal No. 540/2007); Subhash Raghunath Pawar (in Cri. Appeal No. 517/2001); Pandharinath Devpa Gholap (in Cri. Appeal No. 567/2001)
Haribhau alias Bhausaheb Dinkar, Raju alias Rajendra Bhiwrao Shirawale, Vitthal Baburao Shinde, Subhash Raghunath Pawar (in Cri. Appeal No. 626/2001); State of Maharashtra (in other appeals)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeals against conviction and acquittal in a murder and attempt to murder case arising from a family land dispute.
Remedy Sought
State sought conviction of acquitted accused; convicted accused sought acquittal.
Filing Reason
Appeals against the judgment and order dated 18th May, 2001 in Sessions Case No.72 of 2000 by the VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC, sentenced to life imprisonment and 7 years RI; convicted accused No. 6 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC, sentenced to 7 years RI and fine; acquitted accused Nos. 3, 4, and 5.
Issues
Whether the conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable?
Whether the acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6 is justified?
Submissions/Arguments
State argued that the trial court erred in acquitting accused Nos. 3 to 6 despite evidence of common intention.
Convicted accused argued that the evidence was insufficient and that they were falsely implicated due to family enmity.
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction of accused Nos. 1 and 2 was based on credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence establishing common intention to commit murder and attempt to murder. The acquittal of accused Nos. 3 to 6 was upheld due to lack of evidence of their participation or common object.
Judgment Excerpts
In Sessions Case No.72 of 2000 in all six accused came to be tried by the learned VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307 and alternatively under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
By the judgment and order dated 18th May, 2001 accused Nos. 1 and 2 came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 307 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.
Procedural History
The trial court in Sessions Case No.72 of 2000 convicted accused Nos. 1 and 2 under Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 IPC, convicted accused No. 6 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC, and acquitted accused Nos. 3, 4, and 5. The State appealed against the acquittal in Criminal Appeal No. 626 of 2001. Accused No. 1 appealed in Criminal Appeal No. 567 of 2001, accused No. 2 in Criminal Appeal No. 540 of 2007, and accused No. 6 in Criminal Appeal No. 517 of 2001. All appeals were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34, 326, 143
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 428
