Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shahajahan Aliakbar Khan, was convicted by the Sessions Court for offences under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and two years rigorous imprisonment for causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon. The incident occurred on 6 December 2006 near Buckley building, Colaba, Mumbai, where a group of five friends (including the deceased Harish Savare and injured witnesses) had a scuffle with another group of waiters. During the altercation, the appellant arrived with a knife and stabbed Harish, Sabir Ansari, and Anod Kahar. Harish died from his injuries. The appellant was also injured and was arrested from the hospital. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses, including injured eyewitnesses PW1 Sunil Shendge, PW6 Ganesh Haldar, and PW7 Sabir Ansari, who identified the appellant in a test identification parade conducted on 19 December 2006. The trial court convicted the appellant. In appeal, the appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the identification was doubtful and the evidence was unreliable. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the injured witnesses were natural witnesses whose presence at the scene was established. Their testimony was consistent and corroborated by medical evidence. The test identification parade was conducted promptly and was valid. However, regarding the conviction under Section 326 IPC, the court noted that the prosecution did not prove that the injuries caused to the victims were grievous as defined under Section 320 IPC. The medical certificates did not specify the nature of injuries. Therefore, the conviction under Section 326 IPC was set aside. The court upheld the conviction under Section 302 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment. The appeal was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Conviction based on testimony of injured witnesses - The court held that the testimony of injured witnesses PW1, PW6, and PW7 is reliable and trustworthy as they were present at the scene and sustained injuries. Their consistent identification of the accused in the test identification parade and in court corroborates the prosecution case. The appeal against conviction under Section 302 IPC was dismissed. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Law - Grievous Hurt - Section 326 IPC - Conviction set aside - The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the injuries caused to the victims were grievous in nature as defined under Section 320 IPC. The medical evidence did not specify the nature of injuries. Hence, the conviction under Section 326 IPC was set aside. (Paras 11-12) C) Criminal Law - Test Identification Parade - Admissibility - The test identification parade conducted on 19.12.2006, within 13 days of the incident, was held to be valid and reliable. The witnesses identified the accused without any doubt. The court relied on the parade report (Exhibit 23) and the testimony of the SEO. (Paras 8-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence of injured witnesses and identification parade.
Final Decision
The appeal is partly allowed. The conviction under Section 302 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment are upheld. The conviction under Section 326 IPC and the sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 326 IPC.
Law Points
- Testimony of injured witness is reliable and can be sole basis for conviction
- Identification in test identification parade is admissible if conducted without delay
- Common intention under Section 34 IPC requires prior meeting of minds
- Conviction under Section 326 IPC requires proof of grievous hurt caused by dangerous weapon
