Case Note & Summary
The judgment arises from three appeals against a common judgment and order dated 14.2.2008 of the learned Sessions Judge, Pandharpur, in Sessions Case No.68 of 2006. The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with 34 IPC for the murder of one person. The prosecution case was that on the night of the incident, the accused persons, including Hari Laxman Karande (original accused No.1), Sandip Hari Karande (original accused No.2), Kapil Hari Karande (original accused No.3), and Nagarbai Hari Karande (original accused No.4), in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted the deceased with weapons, causing his death. The trial court convicted all four accused. The appeals were filed by the accused against their conviction, and the State also filed an appeal against the acquittal of some accused. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimonies of the eyewitnesses, and found material inconsistencies and contradictions. The court noted that the prosecution witnesses gave varying accounts of the incident, and the presence of all accused at the scene was not consistently established. The court also observed that the medical evidence did not fully support the prosecution's version of the assault. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the common intention and the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court allowed the appeals of the accused, set aside their conviction, and acquitted them. The State's appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Common Intention - Section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence - Inconsistencies in the testimony of prosecution witnesses regarding the presence of accused and the manner of assault - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the common intention and the presence of all accused at the scene beyond reasonable doubt - Acquittal ordered (Paras 1-33).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with 34 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeals of the accused (Criminal Appeal No.224 of 2008 and Criminal Appeal No.242 of 2008) are allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are set aside. The accused are acquitted. The appeal by the State (Criminal Appeal No.859 of 2008) is dismissed.
Law Points
- Common intention
- Section 34 IPC
- Circumstantial evidence
- Inconsistencies in prosecution case
- Benefit of doubt
