Case Note & Summary
The case involves a criminal revision application filed by Shantaram Krishna Karkhandis (original accused No.1) and his mother Suman Shantaram Karkhandis (original accused No.3) challenging their conviction under Section 313 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for causing miscarriage without the consent of the victim, Barkibai. The victim, Barkibai, was the wife of Shantaram's brother. She became pregnant after her husband's death. Shantaram and his mother allegedly forced her to abort the pregnancy by administering an injection and tablets. The trial court convicted both accused and sentenced them to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3,000 each. The appeal before the Sessions Court was dismissed. In revision, the High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the victim and medical evidence. The court found that the prosecution had proved that the miscarriage was caused without the victim's consent. However, the court noted that there was no evidence to show that Shantaram shared a common intention with his mother to cause the miscarriage. Shantaram was not present at the time of the incident, and there was no prior meeting of minds. Therefore, the court held that the conviction of Shantaram under Section 313 read with Section 34 IPC was unsustainable. The court upheld the conviction of Suman under Section 313 IPC but set aside the conviction of Shantaram. The court directed that Shantaram be acquitted and his bail bonds be discharged.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Causing Miscarriage Without Consent - Section 313 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on medical evidence and testimony of victim - The prosecution established that the victim was administered an injection and given tablets which caused abortion without her consent - The trial court and appellate court concurrently found the accused guilty - Held that the conviction of accused No.1 (Shantaram) and accused No.3 (Suman) under Section 313 IPC is correct and does not warrant interference (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Applicability where there is no evidence of prior meeting of minds - The court found that there was no evidence to show that accused No.1 (husband) shared common intention with accused No.3 (mother) to cause miscarriage - The husband was not present at the time of the incident and there was no material to infer common intention - Held that the conviction of accused No.1 under Section 313 read with Section 34 IPC is unsustainable and he is entitled to acquittal (Paras 11-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the applicants under Section 313 read with Section 34 IPC for causing miscarriage without the consent of the woman is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court partly allowed the revision application. The conviction of applicant No.2 (Suman Shantaram Karkhandis) under Section 313 IPC was upheld. The conviction of applicant No.1 (Shantaram Krishna Karkhandis) under Section 313 read with Section 34 IPC was set aside, and he was acquitted. His bail bonds were discharged.
Law Points
- Section 313 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Causing miscarriage without woman's consent
- Common intention
- Abetment
- Burden of proof
- Medical evidence
- Circumstantial evidence
