Bombay High Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Culpable Homicide in Wooden Plank Assault Case. Appellant's Conviction Under Section 302 IPC Set Aside and Converted to Section 304 Part II IPC Due to Lack of Intent to Kill.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 151
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Nandkumar Shriniwas Kaduskar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of Kiran Eknath Waghmare. The prosecution alleged that on 7th October 1995 at around 11:30 p.m., the deceased abused the accused persons, leading to a scuffle where the appellant beat the deceased with a piece of wood (lakadi) on the head, causing fatal injuries. The deceased's mother, Sindhubai, witnessed the incident and filed a report. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC, while acquitting the co-accused. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court, arguing that the evidence was inadequate and that the offence, if any, would be grievous hurt or culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The High Court, after scrutinizing the evidence, found inconsistencies in the eye witness accounts and noted that the weapon used was a wooden plank, not a lethal weapon. The court held that the appellant had no intention to cause death but had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death. Consequently, the court altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced the appellant to the period already undergone (about 7 years), setting aside the life sentence.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Appreciation of Evidence - The court examined the evidence of eye witnesses and found inconsistencies and lack of corroboration regarding the exact role of the appellant - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the charge of murder beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-5).

B) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Intention and Knowledge - The court considered the nature of the weapon (wooden plank) and the circumstances of the incident - Held that the appellant had no intention to cause death but had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death, thus altering the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for murder is sustainable based on the evidence on record, and if not, what lesser offence is made out.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal partly allowed. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside. Appellant convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced to the period of imprisonment already undergone (about 7 years). Appellant to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.

Law Points

  • Murder
  • Culpable Homicide
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Section 304 Part II IPC
  • Intention
  • Knowledge
  • Lethal Weapon
  • Appreciation of Evidence
  • Eye Witness Testimony
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2005 LawText (BOM) (08) 40

Criminal Appeal No. 423 of 1998

2005-07-26

V.G. Palshikar, R.C. Chavan

Shri Rahul S. Kate for appellant, Shri A. S. Shitole APP for State

Nandkumar Shriniwas Kaduskar

The State of Maharashtra

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal or alteration of conviction to a lesser offence.

Filing Reason

Appellant aggrieved by judgment dated 27-2-1998 of Additional Sessions Judge, Pune convicting him under Section 302 IPC.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant under Section 302 IPC and acquitted co-accused.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable on the evidence on record. Whether the offence falls under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that evidence is inadequate, eye witness account is not proper, and trial court could have acquitted appellant as it acquitted co-accused. Appellant alternatively submitted that weapon (wooden plank) is not lethal, intention was only to chastise, not kill, so conviction under Section 302 IPC is erroneous; at most grievous hurt or Section 304 Part II IPC.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the evidence did not establish an intention to cause death, but the appellant had knowledge that his act of hitting the deceased on the head with a wooden plank was likely to cause death. Therefore, the offence falls under Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and not Section 302 IPC (murder).

Judgment Excerpts

The learned trial Judge therefore erred in convicting the accused no.1 under section 302 IPC. The intention was only to chastitise the victim and not to kill him. We will consider these submissions of the learned counsel in the light of the evidence that exists on record.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on 27-2-1998 in Sessions Case No. 524 of 1995 under Section 302 IPC. He appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard the appeal and delivered judgment on 26-7-2005.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 323, 201, 34, 304 Part II
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Culpable Homicide in Wooden Plank Assault Case. Appellant's Conviction Under Section 302 IPC Set Aside and Converted to Section 304 Part II IPC Due to Lack of Intent to Kill.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Bans Mining in Eco-Sensitive Zones Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries. Minimum 1 km Buffer Zone Mandated to Protect Forest Resources and Wildlife Habitat Under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and Forest Conservation A...