Case Note & Summary
The appellants, original accused Nos. 1 to 3, were convicted by the IInd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Palghar, on 31.5.2002 for offences under Sections 307 read with 34 IPC and 302 read with 34 IPC, and sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and life imprisonment respectively. They appealed against their conviction. The High Court heard the counsel for the appellants and the learned APP. At the outset, the Court noted that the case of the prosecution as reflected in the FIR (Exhibit 28) lodged by Prema Dayanand Patil was different from the case sought to be proved at trial, and the difference was not minor but material and major. In the FIR, the complainant stated that she resided at Navapur, Banglipada, Agashi Taluka, Vasai, Dist. Thane, and on 1.10.1998 at 9 a.m., she came to her maternal house at Kalamb Ranbhag with her husband and children for Dassera. Her brother Mahendra had agricultural land by the seaside, and on the way to that field there was a house of accused No.1 Harichandra. About 8-9 months before the incident, Harichandra and his companions had assaulted Kishore Gowari, her cousin, with a koita and axe. The Court found that the FIR version was materially different from the evidence led at trial, and therefore the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted. The Court directed that the appellants be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder and Attempt to Murder - Sections 302, 307, 34 IPC - Material Contradiction - The prosecution's case as per FIR differed materially from the evidence adduced at trial, leading to a finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt - Held that such material variation entitles the accused to benefit of doubt and acquittal (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302 and 307 read with 34 IPC is sustainable when there are material contradictions between the FIR and the evidence led at trial.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants acquitted. They be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Material contradiction between FIR and trial evidence
- Benefit of doubt
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 307 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
