Case Note & Summary
The present appeal challenges the legality of the judgment dated 14.09.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Court, Islampur in Sessions Case No.34 of 2010 convicting the appellant (original accused No.1) under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Original accused No.2 has been acquitted by the Trial Court. The prosecution's case is based on ocular i.e. eye witness's evidence. The facts emerging from the record are that complainant Anil Bhagwan Waghmare (PW-2) resides in Harijan Wada at village Aund; adjacent to his house is the house of deceased Ramesh Kamble. Accused Arun Maruti Ghevade lived with his family opposite Ramesh's house. Three months prior to the incident, there was a quarrel between one Amrit and Ramesh on account of taking water from the common tap. Fifteen days prior to the incident, mother of accused, Mandabai filed police complaint against Ramesh and his relatives Shivaji, Pandurang, Yesabai in Shirala Police Station and Police took steps pursuant thereto. Hence, accused had grudge against Ramesh. On 30.06.2010, a bullock cart race was organized near Rajbageshwar Dargah, Islampur. Complainant, PW-2 Anil, deceased Ramesh, PW-3 Pandurang, PW-4 Madhukar Patil and one Shankar Jadhav arrived in a tempo with bullocks of PW-4 to part. The legal issues considered were whether the conviction based on eye witness testimony is sustainable. The arguments centered on the credibility of the eye witness and minor discrepancies. The court's analysis found that the eye witness testimony was credible and corroborated by medical evidence and motive. The decision upheld the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 read with 34 IPC - Conviction based on eye witness testimony - Minor discrepancies in eye witness account do not discredit credible testimony when corroborated by medical evidence and motive - Held that the trial court's conviction is sustainable (Paras 1-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 read with 34 IPC based on eye witness testimony is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302 read with 34 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Murder conviction upheld
- Eye witness testimony
- Minor discrepancies
- Corroboration with medical evidence
- Motive
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
