Case Note & Summary
The case arises from an incident on 10.9.1997 where a mob allegedly attacked the house of Sanjay Parode, whose son was arrested for a double murder. The mob, comprising the appellants and one other accused, was alleged to have pelted stones, attempted to push the inmates into a fire, pulled down beams and bamboos of the roof, and burnt household articles, causing injury to Kausalya Parode. The police registered an FIR based on a report by Shaligram, the Police Patil. After investigation, nine appellants and one other were chargesheeted. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 143, 147, 452, 436 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment and fines. The appellants appealed to the High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimony of injured witnesses Kausalya Parode and Sarla Parode, and the panch witness. The court found that the evidence regarding the common object of the unlawful assembly was insufficient, as the witnesses did not clearly state that the appellants shared a common object to commit the offences. However, the court upheld the conviction under Section 452 (house trespass) and Section 323 (hurt) based on the reliable testimony of the injured witnesses. The court also noted that the acquittal of one co-accused did not automatically entitle the appellants to acquittal. The court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the convictions under Sections 143, 147, and 436, but maintaining the convictions under Sections 452 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC. The sentences were modified to the period already undergone.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Sections 143, 147, 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution must prove that the accused shared a common object to commit the alleged offences. In the absence of clear evidence of common object, conviction under Section 149 cannot be sustained. (Paras 6-10) B) Criminal Law - House Trespass - Section 452 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction for house trespass requires proof that the accused entered the house with intent to commit an offence. Testimony of injured witnesses can be relied upon to establish such entry. (Paras 11-12) C) Criminal Law - Mischief by Fire - Section 436 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - For conviction under Section 436, the prosecution must prove that the accused set fire to the house. In the absence of direct evidence linking the appellants to the act of setting fire, they are entitled to acquittal. (Paras 13-15) D) Criminal Law - Hurt - Section 323 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction for voluntarily causing hurt can be based on the testimony of the injured victim, which is considered reliable unless there are strong reasons to disbelieve. (Paras 16-17)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants for offences under Sections 143, 147, 452, 436 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed in part. Convictions under Sections 143, 147 and 436 read with Section 149 IPC are set aside. Convictions under Sections 452 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC are maintained. Sentences modified to the period already undergone.
Law Points
- Common object under Section 149 IPC must be proved
- Acquittal of co-accused does not automatically entitle others to acquittal
- Testimony of injured witnesses is given great weight
- Discrepancies in evidence may lead to benefit of doubt
