Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a conviction under Section 302 read with Sections 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon in Sessions Case No.79 of 2010. The appellants, along with others, were convicted for the murder of a person during a wedding function on 11 April 2010. The prosecution alleged that the accused formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the deceased with weapons, resulting in his death. The appellants appealed against the conviction. The High Court of Bombay at Nagpur Bench heard the appeals. The court analyzed the evidence of prosecution witnesses, particularly Raju Bhaidas Bhat (PW5) and other eyewitnesses. It found significant inconsistencies in their testimonies regarding the presence of each accused, the weapons used, and the sequence of events. The court noted that the prosecution failed to prove the common object of the unlawful assembly as required under Section 149 IPC. The court held that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the conviction. Consequently, the court allowed the appeals, set aside the conviction, and acquitted all appellants. The court directed that the appellants be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Unlawful Assembly - Common Object - Sections 302, 148, 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellants were convicted for murder with the aid of Section 149 IPC. The court examined whether the prosecution proved the existence of an unlawful assembly with a common object to commit murder. Held that the evidence of witnesses was inconsistent and contradictory regarding the role of each accused and the common object. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the common object beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore the conviction under Section 149 IPC was unsustainable. (Paras 1-20) B) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Inconsistencies - Benefit of Doubt - The court noted material inconsistencies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, particularly regarding the presence of accused and the manner of assault. Held that such inconsistencies create reasonable doubt, and the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 15-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 read with Sections 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable in law based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Both appeals are allowed. The judgment and order of conviction passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khamgaon in Sessions Case No.79 of 2010 is quashed and set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. They are directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 148 IPC
- Section 149 IPC
- Common object
- Unlawful assembly
- Inconsistencies in evidence
- Benefit of doubt
