Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ayubkhan Khodadad Khan, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, for an offence punishable under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The case arose from an incident on 9 February 1994, where the complainant, Bilal Ahmed, alleged that the appellant fired three rounds from a revolver, hitting him on the waist, chest, and left wrist. The prosecution relied primarily on the testimony of the complainant (PW-2) and other witnesses. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the complainant's testimony was inconsistent with the medical evidence and other witness accounts. The court noted that the complainant had not mentioned the presence of certain witnesses in his FIR, and there were contradictions regarding the sequence of events. The court also observed that the appellant was a trustee of a school and the incident arose from a dispute over school management. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore, the conviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Commit Culpable Homicide - Section 308 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on sole eyewitness - Appeal against conviction - Court examined the evidence of the sole eyewitness and found inconsistencies and contradictions - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt - Conviction set aside and appellant acquitted (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Section 308 IPC
- conviction based on sole eyewitness
- benefit of doubt
- inconsistent evidence
- identification of accused
