Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to the murder of Mayadi Sohaiya Konar (deceased) on 21st February 2002 at about 9:30 am. The appellants, Subramani Mandar Konar and A. Maharaja Armogam Tevar, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Brihan-Mumbai in Sessions Case No.716 of 2002 for the murder of the deceased in furtherance of their common intention under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Each was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- with default simple imprisonment for one month. The prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence including motive, last seen evidence, and recovery of weapons. The motive was that appellant no.1 had taken a photograph of P.W.6 (daughter of P.W.4 and P.W.5) and a quarrel ensued when P.W.5 demanded its return. The deceased, a relative of P.W.4, intervened and was threatened by the appellants. On the day of the incident, the deceased was last seen with the appellants near a nullah. Later, his body was found with stab wounds. The appellants were arrested and weapons were recovered at their instance. The trial court convicted them. On appeal, the Bombay High Court re-appreciated the evidence and found that the chain of circumstances was complete, the dying declaration was reliable, and the recovery of weapons was proved. The court held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Sections 302, 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Appellants convicted for murder of deceased based on motive, last seen evidence, and recovery of weapons - Court held that the chain of circumstances was complete and pointed to the guilt of the appellants - Held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-30). B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Credibility - Appellants challenged dying declaration as not reliable - Court examined the dying declaration and found it to be voluntary and truthful - Held that the dying declaration could be relied upon (Paras 15-20). C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Conviction - Appreciation of Evidence - Appellate court re-appreciated the evidence on record - Held that the trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and did not warrant interference (Paras 25-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC based on circumstantial evidence is sustainable.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Circumstantial evidence
- motive
- last seen theory
- common intention
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 302 IPC
- recovery of weapon
- dying declaration
- credibility of witnesses
