Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Appellant for Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder in Theft Resistance Incident. The court found that the appellant had knowledge that his act of assaulting two persons with iron scissors and fists/kicks was likely to cause death, but no intention to cause death, under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Prosecution
  • 135
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Josh S/o C Mathew, was prosecuted for offences under Sections 302, 307, 323, and 429 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for an incident on 22.02.2008 between 3 a.m. and 3.30 a.m. He assaulted Bhima Patil and Jaibai Musalde with an iron scissors and fists/kicks when they resisted his attempt to commit theft. The Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) for each death, Section 323 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt), and Section 429 IPC (mischief by killing or maiming cattle). He was sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine for each Section 304 Part II offence, six months for Section 323, and one year for Section 429, with sentences to run concurrently. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court challenging the conviction and sentence. The High Court, after considering the facts and evidence, upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, finding that the appellant had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death but no intention to cause death. The court did not interfere with the sentence. The appeal was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder - Section 304 Part II Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant assaulted two persons with iron scissors and fists/kicks while they resisted his attempt to commit theft, resulting in their deaths. The trial court convicted him under Section 304 Part II IPC. The High Court upheld the conviction, finding that the appellant had the knowledge that his act was likely to cause death but no intention to cause death. (Paras 1-3)

B) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Section 304 Part II Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine for each of the two offences under Section 304 Part II IPC, with sentences to run concurrently. The High Court did not interfere with the sentence. (Paras 1-2)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant's conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC for causing death of two persons while resisting theft is sustainable.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence under Section 304 Part II IPC and other sections are upheld.

Law Points

  • Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
  • Section 304 Part II IPC
  • Section 323 IPC
  • Section 429 IPC
  • theft resistance
  • common intention
  • sentencing
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (03) 33

Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2010

2012-03-02

A.M. Thipsay

Shri C.R. Deshpande for appellant, Shri N.R. Shaikh, A.P.P. for respondent/State

Josh S/o C Mathew

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction and sentence

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to challenge the judgment and order of conviction and sentences passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada.

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted for offences under Sections 304 Part II, 323, and 429 IPC for assaulting two persons who resisted his theft attempt.

Previous Decisions

The Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, convicted the appellant on 30.11.2010 in Sessions Case No. 12 of 2009.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is sustainable.

Submissions/Arguments

Not mentioned in the provided text.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant had knowledge that his act of assaulting the victims with iron scissors and fists/kicks was likely to cause death, but no intention to cause death, thus the offence falls under Section 304 Part II IPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant was prosecuted on the allegation of having committed offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found that the appellant had committed two different offences, both punishable under Section 304 (Part II) of the IPC.

Procedural History

The appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, in Sessions Case No. 12 of 2009, convicted on 30.11.2010, and sentenced. He appealed to the Bombay High Court on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 307, 323, 429, 304 (Part II)
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 173(2)(i)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Collector's Order Declaring No Right to Gairan Land. Encroachment on Government Land Cannot Be Regularized Without Following Due Process Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Arbitrator's Interim Award on Limitation in Commercial Arbitration. Winding Up Proceedings Constitute Civil Proceedings for Exclusion of Time Under Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963.