Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Waman Shendge and his wife Kantabai, were convicted by the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim on 31.8.2006 in Sessions Trial No. 28/2006 for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years each and a fine of Rs.200 each. They were originally charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for the murder of Deorao Shamrao Gawali, but the trial court acquitted them of that charge. The State did not appeal against the acquittal. The incident occurred on 9.2.2005 when the deceased Deorao went to his cattle shed and had a quarrel with the appellants over urination near their house. During the quarrel, the appellants allegedly assaulted Deorao with sticks, causing injuries. Deorao lodged an oral report at the police station and was sent for medical examination. He later died. The appellants challenged their conviction before the High Court. The High Court, after hearing arguments and examining the record, found that the medical evidence showed the injuries were simple and not sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. There was no evidence of intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. The incident arose from a sudden quarrel without premeditation. Therefore, the High Court held that the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC was not sustainable and set aside the conviction and sentence, acquitting the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Conviction set aside - Appellants were convicted for causing death of deceased by inflicting injuries - Medical evidence showed injuries were simple and not sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature - No intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death - Held that conviction under Section 304 Part II is not sustainable (Paras 1-10).
B) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - Acquittal - No evidence of common intention to cause death - Incident arose from sudden quarrel over urination - No premeditation - Held that Section 34 IPC cannot be invoked (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable in law and on facts.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellants of the offence under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC.
Law Points
- Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Common intention
- Medical evidence
- Intent to cause death
- Sufficiency of injuries
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (01) 144
Criminal Appeal No. 496 of 2006
Mr. C. A. Joshi for the appellant, Mr. M. K. Pathan, A. P. P. for respondent/State
Waman S/o Pandurang Shendge and Sau. Kantabai W/o Waman Shendge
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought acquittal by setting aside conviction and sentence under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC.
Filing Reason
Appellants were convicted by trial court for causing death of Deorao Gawali by assaulting him with sticks following a quarrel over urination.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted appellants under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to five years RI and fine; acquitted them of Section 302 IPC.
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is sustainable given the medical evidence that injuries were not sufficient to cause death?
Whether there was common intention under Section 34 IPC to cause death?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the medical evidence showed injuries were simple and not sufficient to cause death, and there was no intention to cause death.
Respondent/State argued that the conviction was correct and should be upheld.
Ratio Decidendi
For conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, the prosecution must prove that the accused caused death with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. In this case, medical evidence showed injuries were simple and not sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, and there was no evidence of intention to cause death or such injury. Hence, conviction was not sustainable.
Judgment Excerpts
Appellants – Waman Shendge and Sau. Kantabai Shendge, the husband and wife, are challenging their conviction imposed on them by the learned 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim on 31.8.2006 in Sessions Trial No. 28/2006, by which the Court below convicted both of them for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for Five years each and to pay a fine of Rs.200/ each and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One month.
Though, the appellants were charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Deorao Shamrao Gawali in an incident dated 09.2.2005, the Court below acquitted both of them from the said charge.
Procedural History
The appellants were tried in Sessions Trial No. 28/2006 before the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim, who convicted them under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC on 31.8.2006. They appealed to the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, which heard the appeal and delivered judgment on 28.1.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 304 Part II, 34, 302
