Case Note & Summary
This criminal appeal arose from the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his 85-year-old grandmother. The prosecution case was that on 15 February 2009, at Bazar Wahegaon, the accused, who was frustrated with caring for the elderly woman and blamed her for his previous imprisonment, deliberately dropped her from an Ota onto the road and then struck her head with a stone, causing fatal injuries. The First Information Report was lodged by PW1 Petrus Arsul early the next morning, and investigation led to the arrest of the accused, seizure of bloodstained clothes and weapons, and a post-mortem. The trial court, relying on the testimony of eyewitnesses PWs 1, 3 and 4, convicted the appellant and sentenced him to life imprisonment. On appeal, the appellant contended that the evidence was unreliable, the act was unpremeditated and occurred in sudden heat of anger, making it a case under Section 304 Part II rather than murder, and that the trial was vitiated because the court did not conduct a proper inquiry into his alleged insanity as required by Sections 328 and 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The appellant placed reliance on older decisions interpreting analogous provisions of the 1898 Code. The State countered that there was cogent direct evidence, motive was immaterial, and no infirmity in the procedure. At the hearing, the High Court deferred consideration of the insanity point and proceeded to examine the prosecution evidence. The judgment excerpt provided ends before a final determination, with the court analyzing witness testimony and cross-examination. Thus, the ultimate decision on the appeal and the precise ratio cannot be ascertained from the available text.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure – Insanity of Accused – Inquiry under Sections 328, 329 CrPC – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 328, 329 – Accused argued trial vitiated because court did not examine psychiatrist despite report Exh.12; court reserved consideration of insanity question to after assessing prosecution evidence. (Para 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC was sustainable on the evidence, and whether the trial court erred in not conducting an inquiry into the accused's alleged insanity under Sections 328 and 329 of the CrPC.
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (08) 23
Criminal Appeal No. 192 of 2012
S.S. Shinde, A.I.S. Cheema
Shri D.S. Ladda, holding for Shri S.G. Ladda (Appellant); Shri S.D. Kaldate, A.P.P. (Respondent)
Yosef s/o Bhanudas Athawale
The State of Maharashtra through Police Station, Badnapur, District Jalna
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought acquittal or reduction of conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC, and alternatively argued that trial was vitiated due to failure to inquire into insanity of accused.
Filing Reason
Appeal filed against judgment dated 30.7.2010 in Sessions Case No.76/2009 convicting the appellant.
Previous Decisions
Convicted by Additional Sessions Judge-2, Jalna on 30.7.2010 under Section 302 IPC.
Issues
Whether the trial court properly appreciated the evidence of eye-witnesses P.W.1, P.W.3, and P.W.4.
Whether the act fell under Section 302 IPC or Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
Whether the trial court was required to conduct an inquiry into the accused's alleged insanity under Sections 328 and 329 CrPC before proceeding with trial.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the evidence of eye-witnesses was unreliable, the incident was not premeditated and occurred in sudden heat of anger falling under Section 304 Part II, the accused was insane and the trial was vitiated for not examining the psychiatrist, and the case was motivated by a land dispute.
Respondent contended that the eye-witnesses were credible, motive was not material when direct evidence was present, the accused acted intentionally, and there was no procedural infirmity regarding the insanity plea.
Judgment Excerpts
The Appellant – original accused ... has filed this appeal against his conviction ... under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1000/- ...
According to the charge sheet ... the accused on 15.2.2009 ... murdered his grandmother Samindrabai Onkar Ghorpade, aged about 85 years, as the old lady had troubled his parents and his aunt and was also troubling him and he was tired of looking after her.
The defence of the accused is of denial. According to him, in order to grab his land the offence has been brought against him. Samindrabai died due to fall from Ota.
The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the evidence of P.W.1 Petrus as well as P.Ws.3 and 4 was unreliable. The act alleged was not premeditated. ... the case would at the most fall under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.
the trial Court should have examined the concerned Doctor before going ahead with the trial. It has been argued that, the trial was vitiated because of this.
We will consider the question regarding insanity subsequently. First we proceed to look into the evidence to see if the offence is established and initial burden which is on the prosecution to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt is discharged.
Procedural History
Incident occurred on 15.2.2009 between 6:30-7:00 p.m. F.I.R. lodged by P.W.1 Petrus on 16.2.2009 at 7:15 a.m., Crime No.26/2009 at Badnapur Police Station. Investigation carried out, including spot panchanama, seizure of stones, clothes, blood samples, and discovery of stick at instance of accused. Charge sheet filed. Case committed to Sessions. Charge framed on 9.7.2009 under Section 302 IPC. Accused pleaded not guilty. Trial held before Additional Sessions Judge-2, Jalna, who convicted the accused on 30.7.2010. Appeal filed as Criminal Appeal No.192/2012. High Court reserved judgment on 14/07/2015 and pronounced it on 14/08/2015.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 304 Part II
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 313, 328, 329
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898: 464, 465
