Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 10th August 2007 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-6, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2005, whereby the respondents (accused) were acquitted for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 294 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution was that on 28th September 2004, during a Ganesh immersion procession, the accused Manoj @ Balya Gudadhe, under the influence of liquor, abused the deceased Sohan Yadav, who was of the Dawke community. The accused caught hold of the deceased, dragged him inside his house, and inflicted a knife blow on his left armpit, causing his death. The deceased was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. The wife of the deceased lodged an oral report (Exh.39). The trial court acquitted the accused, leading to the present appeal. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimonies of eyewitnesses Nilkanth Uikey (PW-1) and Arvind Sharma (PW-2). The court found material inconsistencies in their statements regarding the manner of assault and the weapon used. PW-1 stated that the accused gave fist blows and then used a knife, while PW-2 stated that the accused used a sword. The court also noted that the witnesses were not consistent about the exact location of the incident and the sequence of events. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court's acquittal was based on a proper appreciation of evidence. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Acquittal - Inconsistent Evidence - The prosecution case relied on eyewitnesses whose testimonies were inconsistent and contradictory regarding the manner of assault and the weapon used. The court held that such inconsistencies create reasonable doubt, and the accused are entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 2-10)
B) Criminal Law - Identification - Doubtful Identification - The identification of the accused by witnesses was doubtful due to contradictions in their statements and the circumstances of the incident. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 5-8)
C) Criminal Law - Sections 302, 201, 294 IPC - Acquittal - The trial court's acquittal was based on the lack of credible evidence and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case. The High Court found no perversity in the trial court's findings and upheld the acquittal. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 302, 201, 294 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was justified based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court is upheld.
Law Points
- Acquittal upheld
- Inconsistent evidence
- Doubtful identification
- Benefit of doubt
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 201 IPC
- Section 294 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (07) 158
Criminal Appeal (APEAL) No. 498 of 2011
P.N. Deshmukh, M.G. Giratkar
Ms. H.N. Jaipurkar (APP for appellant), Shri R.S. Kurekar (Advocate for respondents)
Balya @ Manoj Madhukar Gudadhe and Sheela Madhukar Gudadhe
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal for murder and related offences.
Remedy Sought
The State of Maharashtra sought reversal of the trial court's acquittal of the respondents.
Filing Reason
The State challenged the acquittal on the ground that the trial court erred in appreciating the evidence.
Previous Decisions
The trial court acquitted the respondents for offences under Sections 302, 201, 294 read with Section 34 IPC.
Issues
Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt?
Whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant/State argued that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence.
The respondents argued that the prosecution evidence was inconsistent and unreliable.
Ratio Decidendi
The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistent and contradictory evidence of eyewitnesses. The trial court's acquittal was based on proper appreciation of evidence and not perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
The case of the appellant/prosecution against the respondents (hereinafter referred as accused), in short, is as under :
Deceased Sohan Yadav was residing near Yeshwant Stadium at Sangam Chawl within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Dhantoli, Nagpur.
On 28.09.2004, at about 5 o' clock, deceased returned from his work.
At about 06:30 p.m., men and women of their locality started procession for immersion of idol of Lord Ganesh.
At about 09:00 p.m., all the persons, who went for immersion, returned back.
Deceased came in front of Ganesh Utsav Mandal, Udasi Mandir, after immersion of Lord Ganesh in Futala water tank.
Dinner was arranged there in the pendal for the people who had gone for immersion.
At that time, accused Manoj @ Balya Gudadhe, who was under the influence of liquor, was abusing without any reason saying, “Saale Dawke Log Madarchod Rahate Hai”.
Deceased was of Dawke community.
Deceased asked Manoj as to why he was abusing them.
Accused Manoj caught hold collar of deceased, took him while dragging inside his house.
Nilkanth Uikey and Arvind Sharma were behind.
They went near the door of the house of accused.
Accused gave fist blows on the nose and chest of deceased.
Deceased fell down.
Accused Manoj took out one small sword (knife) kept under the mattress and by holding it with his right hand, he delivered its blow on the left armpit portion of deceased.
Deceased fell down and started bleeding profusely.
On deceased shouting as “Mara Re”, Arvind Sharma, Sanjay Ambadare, Samir Yadav brought auto rickshaw.
They uplifted deceased Sohan from the house of accused.
When they were taking deceased to Medical College, they stopped auto rickshaw in front of Police Station, Dhantoli and informed the police.
Police advised them to go to Medical College.
Doctor examined deceased Sohan and declared him dead.
Wife of deceased namely Kusum lodged oral report (Exh.39).
Procedural History
The trial court (Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-6, Nagpur) acquitted the respondents in Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2005 on 10th August 2007. The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, which dismissed the appeal on 24th July 2018.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 201, 294, 34
