Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal against the acquittal recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case No. 76/1998. The respondents, nine accused, were charged with offences under Sections 302, 307, 149, 147 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case arose from an incident on 19.10.1997 in village Digras (Bk.), where a dispute over providing a musical band led to a violent confrontation. The deceased Pandit and his brother Venkati (PW1) were attacked by the accused. Initially, on 18.10.1997, accused No. 6 Kashiram had abused them for not giving the band to persons from Mangwada. The next morning, Kashiram called them for a meeting near the Village Panchayat Office. When Pandit and Venkati arrived, they found the accused and Sarpanch Nagnath present. During the quarrel, accused No. 1 Dhondiba stabbed Pandit with a knife on the abdomen and back, causing fatal injuries. Venkati intervened and sustained knife injuries from Dhondiba and stone pelting from others. Pandit died in hospital; Venkati survived. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses, including PW1 (injured eye-witness), PW3 (independent eye-witness), and medical evidence. PW2 turned hostile but corroborated shifting of injured. The trial court acquitted all accused, finding no explanation for injury on accused No. 1, disbelief of eye-witnesses, and benefit of doubt. On appeal, the High Court observed that the trial court failed to properly appreciate the evidence of the injured witness and independent witness, whose testimony was consistent with medical evidence. The court held that the injury on accused No. 1 was explained by PW1 as an accidental stone hit aimed at the deceased. The hostile witness's evidence regarding shifting to hospital was accepted to that extent. The court found that the accused shared a common object to kill the deceased and injure Venkati, attracting Section 149 IPC. The appeal was partly allowed: accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 were convicted under Sections 302, 307, 149, 147 IPC. Accused No. 1 was sentenced to life imprisonment and fine for murder, and 10 years for attempt to murder. The others were convicted with the aid of Section 149 and sentenced accordingly. Acquittal of accused No. 4 was maintained due to lack of specific overt act.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Fatal stabbing with knife causing death - Held that prosecution proved intentional killing through credible eye-witnesses and medical evidence, conviction for murder sustained (Paras 25-27, 30). B) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Infliction of multiple knife injuries on injured witness - Held that accused caused injuries with intent to kill, conviction under Section 307 with aid of Section 149 proper (Paras 27, 30). C) Criminal Law - Common Object - Section 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Unlawful assembly sharing common object of murder - Held that accused 1,2,3,5,6 formed assembly with common object to kill deceased and injure others, thus liable under Section 149 (Paras 26-27). D) Criminal Law - Rioting - Section 147 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Participation in rioting with deadly weapons - Held that accused participated in rioting, conviction under Section 147 upheld (Paras 27, 29). E) Evidence - Hostile Witness - Sections 145, 154, 155 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Reliability of hostile witness's evidence - Held that evidence of hostile witness can be used to the extent it corroborates prosecution case, here testimony about shifting injured to hospital was relied upon (Paras 18, 20). F) Evidence - Injury on Accused - Duty to explain injury on accused - Held that prosecution successfully explained injury on accused No. 1 through testimony of PW1 that a stone aimed at deceased accidentally hit accused, making explanation plausible (Paras 11, 22). G) Criminal Appeal - Appeal against Acquittal - Scope of High Court's power to reverse acquittal - Held that if trial court's view is perverse or manifestly erroneous, appellate court can interfere; here, trial court's discrediting of eye-witnesses was unjustified (Paras 24, 30). H) Evidence - Credibility of Injured Eye-Witness - Section 3 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Presence of injured witness at scene not doubted, testimony carries weight - Held that injured witness's presence is natural and his evidence consistent with medical evidence, thus reliable (Paras 24-25). I) Criminal Law - Vicarious Liability - Section 149 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Acquittal of co-accused when only omnibus role attributed - Held that mere presence in unlawful assembly without specific overt act or sharing common object does not attract liability under Section 149, benefit of doubt given to accused No. 4 (Paras 26, 30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused for offences under Sections 302, 307, 147, 149 IPC, and whether the prosecution proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision
The appeal is partly allowed. Accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 are convicted under Sections 302, 307, 149, 147 IPC. Acquittal of accused No. 4 confirmed. Accused 1 sentenced to life and fine for 302; 10 years for 307; other accused convicted with aid of 149. All sentenced to pay fine and in default further imprisonment. Sentences to run concurrently.
Law Points
- credibility of injured eye-witness
- injury on accused must be explained
- hostile witness can be relied if corroborated
- section 149 common object
- appellate court's power in acquittal appeal
