Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempt to Murder in Illicit Liquor Dispute — Knife Attack Causing Grievous Injuries. Appellants convicted under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC for stabbing victim multiple times; medical evidence and eyewitness testimony corroborated.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case arises from an incident on 30 August 2011, where the appellants Chandrakant, Nanaji, and Suryakant Shingade attacked Subhash Kanoje with a knife following a dispute over illicit liquor. The victim's wife, Chandrakala Kanoje, lodged an FIR on 1 September 2011, leading to the registration of CR No. 85/2011 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. The trial court convicted the appellants and sentenced them to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the injured (PW3), his wife (PW1), and the medical officer (PW5). The medical evidence showed that the victim suffered multiple stab wounds, including a perforated stomach, which was dangerous to life. The court found the eyewitness accounts credible and consistent, and the medical evidence corroborated the attack. The appellants' defense of alibi was not substantiated. The High Court upheld the conviction, holding that the prosecution had proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 IPC - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - The appellants were convicted for attempting to murder the victim by stabbing him with a knife following a quarrel over illicit liquor. The court held that the medical evidence and eyewitness testimony of the injured and his wife sufficiently proved the offence. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-10)

B) Evidence - Medical Evidence - Corroboration - The injuries sustained by the victim were grievous and dangerous to life, as per the doctor's testimony. The court relied on the medical evidence to corroborate the eyewitness account. (Paras 5-7)

C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Conviction - The High Court found no reason to interfere with the trial court's findings, as the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 8-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld

Law Points

  • Section 307 IPC
  • Section 34 IPC
  • attempt to murder
  • common intention
  • medical evidence corroboration
  • eyewitness testimony
  • conviction upheld
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (06) 171

Criminal Appeal No.281/2015

2017-06-21

V. M. Deshpande

Mr. C. B. Dharmadhikari for appellants, Ms T. Udeshi for respondent

Chandrakant s/o Nanaji Shingade, Nanaji s/o Hagru Shingade, Suryakant s/o Nanaji Shingade

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for attempt to murder

Remedy Sought

Appellants sought acquittal from conviction under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC

Filing Reason

Appellants challenged the trial court's judgment convicting them for attempt to murder

Previous Decisions

Sessions Judge, Gondia convicted appellants on 31.07.2015 in Sessions Trial No.54/2012

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable based on evidence

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the evidence was insufficient and that they were falsely implicated Prosecution argued that the medical and eyewitness evidence proved the offence beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The medical evidence and eyewitness testimony of the injured and his wife sufficiently proved the offence of attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC with common intention under Section 34 IPC. The injuries were dangerous to life, and the prosecution established its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Judgment Excerpts

By the present appeal, the appellants are questioning the correctness of their conviction and sentence imposed upon them by the learned Sessions Judge, Gondia dated 31.07.2015 in Sessions Trial No.54/2012 by which the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC and directed that they shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

Procedural History

FIR lodged on 01.09.2011; investigation by PSI Vasant Sapre; trial court convicted appellants on 31.07.2015; appeal filed in High Court; judgment delivered on 21.06.2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 307, 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempt to Murder in Illicit Liquor Dispute — Knife Attack Causing Grievous Injuries. Appellants convicted under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC for stabbing victim multiple times; medical evidence and ...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Doubtful Identification. Conviction under Sections 302, 307, 324, 504, 506 read with 149 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989...