Bombay High Court Acquits Five Accused in MCOCA Murder Case Due to Unreliable Witness Testimony. Conviction under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with 149 IPC set aside as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 191
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involves five appellants who were convicted by the Special Judge under MCOC Act, Nagpur, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants filed separate criminal appeals challenging the common judgment and order dated 23/05/2016 in Special Criminal MCOC No.7/2013. The prosecution case was that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly and committed murder. The trial court relied on the testimony of witnesses who were interested and lacked independent corroboration. The High Court, after examining the evidence, found that the witnesses were unreliable and their testimonies were inconsistent. The court noted that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court allowed the appeals, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellants of all charges. The court emphasized that in criminal law, the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused when the evidence is not credible.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Unlawful Assembly - Sections 302, 143, 147, 148, 149 IPC - Conviction set aside - The appellants were convicted for murder and unlawful assembly based on testimony of interested witnesses and lack of independent corroboration - The court found the evidence unreliable and held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt - Held that the conviction is unsustainable and appellants are entitled to acquittal (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeals are allowed. The judgment and order of conviction dated 23/05/2016 in Special Criminal MCOC No.7/2013 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.

Law Points

  • Benefit of doubt
  • Unreliable witness testimony
  • Circumstantial evidence
  • Acquittal in murder case
  • MCOCA
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (08) 35

Criminal Appeal No.228 of 2016, Criminal Appeal No.432 of 2016, Criminal Appeal No.38 of 2017, Criminal Appeal No.223 of 2016

2019-08-30

Sunil B. Shukre, S.M. Modak

Shri R.M. Daga, Shri Jaltare, Shri S.S. Doifode, Shri Avinash Gupta, Shri Rakesh Tiwari, Shri M.N. Ali, Shri R.K. Tiwari

Saurabh @ Dabba s/o. Vilas Adlag, Sumit @ Sandy s/o. Ashok Bhasme, Rohit s/o. Sudesh Ramteke, Chandrashekhar @ Chandrya S/o. Arun Kawale, Ketan s/o. Ashok Shambharkar

State of Maharashtra

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeals against conviction for murder and unlawful assembly.

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought acquittal from the conviction under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with Section 149 IPC.

Filing Reason

Appellants were convicted by the Special Judge under MCOC Act, Nagpur, and they challenged the conviction.

Previous Decisions

The trial court convicted the appellants on 23/05/2016 in Special Criminal MCOC No.7/2013.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with Section 149 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the evidence of prosecution witnesses was unreliable and interested. State argued that the conviction was based on credible testimony.

Ratio Decidendi

In criminal law, the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. When the evidence of witnesses is unreliable and lacks independent corroboration, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquittal.

Judgment Excerpts

All these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the same judgment and order... The judgment and order under challenge have been rendered in Special Criminal MCOC No.7/2013 on 23/05/2016...

Procedural History

The trial court convicted the appellants on 23/05/2016. The appellants filed separate criminal appeals before the High Court. The High Court heard all appeals together and delivered a common judgment on 30/08/2019.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 143, 147, 148, 149
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes FIR Against Proprietor in Food Adulteration Case Due to Non-Compliance with Mandatory Sampling Procedure Under Section 11 of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Non-compliance with statutory sampling procedure under S...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Five Accused in MCOCA Murder Case Due to Unreliable Witness Testimony. Conviction under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 read with 149 IPC set aside as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.