Case Note & Summary
The appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenged the judgment and order dated 03.08.2018 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mangaon, Raigad district in Sessions Case No. 46/2016, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs. 50,000 with default rigorous imprisonment for 2 years, and to pay Rs. 40,000 to the sons of the deceased after the appeal period. The appellant, Abdul Shakur Walesab Nadaf, was accused of murdering his wife, Mehjabin Abdul Shakur Nadaf, by stabbing her on 04.05.2016. The first informant, Sarfaraz Abdul Karim Dhangu, brother of the deceased, received a phone call from maternal cousin Mubina Abdul Gani Pathan that the appellant had stabbed his wife and she was sitting on the staircase outside Mubina's house. The injured deceased was taken to Mangaon Rural Hospital and then referred to Sir J.J. Hospital, Mumbai. An FIR was registered under Section 307 IPC, Crime No. 86/2016, and the appellant was arrested the same day. The deceased succumbed to her injuries on 05.05.2016, after which the charge sheet was filed under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution examined seven witnesses: the first informant, Jakir Najir Khan (who saw the appellant in blood-stained clothes and to whom extra-judicial confession was allegedly made), Mubina Abdul Gani Pathan, Daniyal Abdul Shakur Nadaf (son of appellant and deceased and alleged eyewitness), panch witness Sunil Prahlad Shelake, investigating officer Datta Kisan Nalawade, and Dr. Harsh Olhas Panshewdikar who conducted post-mortem. The appellant's statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which he denied the case, and he did not lead defence evidence. The trial court convicted the appellant. In appeal, the appellant's counsel contended that there was no eye-witness except the minor son, the prosecution failed to prove the appellant's presence due to varying statements, P.W.2's testimony about extra-judicial confession and blood-stained clothes lacked corroboration, contradictions existed regarding the appellant and deceased residing together, no fingerprint evidence on the knife was brought on record, no forensic analysis linked the wounds to the weapon, and the dying declaration made by the deceased to P.W.1 while being taken to hospital was unreliable because of her serious injuries. The counsel also argued that out of 28 articles/samples seized, 15 were inconclusive and the blood type of the deceased was not determined, so the blood on seized articles could not be matched. The respondent State argued that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, the appellant admitted in his Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement that he and the deceased resided together, he did not dispute P.W.4's statement that he was present in the house on the day of incident, and the knife was sent for forensic examination. The court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 8th July 2026, pronouncing on 28th August 2026. The provided excerpt does not include the final operative directions or the court's concluding analysis, so the final outcome of the appeal cannot be stated from the available text.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - The prosecution examined seven witnesses to prove the appellant murdered his wife by stabbing, causing injuries that led to her death; the trial court convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and fine - The appellate court was called upon to reassess whether the evidence, including eyewitness testimony of the minor son, dying declaration, and extra-judicial confession, established guilt beyond reasonable doubt - Held that the reliability of each piece of evidence required careful scrutiny due to contradictions and forensic gaps (Paras 1-7). B) Evidence - Dying Declaration - Reliability of Oral Dying Declaration - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 313 - The deceased allegedly named the appellant as assailant to P.W.1 while being taken to hospital in ambulance - Appellant contended that due to serious injuries including head injuries and ruptured intestine, deceased could not have narrated events, making the dying declaration unreliable - The court's assessment of this contention was part of evaluating whether conviction could stand (Paras 2-7). C) Evidence - Extra-Judicial Confession - Corroboration and Credibility - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - P.W.2 deposed that appellant confessed to murder and was seen in blood-stained clothes - Appellant argued no corroboration and contradictions with P.W.4 and P.W.6 about whether appellant and deceased resided together, undermining P.W.2's reliability - The court examined whether such extra-judicial confession could sustain conviction absent independent corroboration (Paras 3-7). D) Evidence - Child Witness - Eyewitness Testimony of Minor Son - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - P.W.4, son of appellant and deceased, was cited as eyewitness to the incident - Appellant argued that apart from the minor son, no other witness was present, and prosecution failed to prove appellant's presence due to varying statements - The court considered the probative value of the child witness's testimony in the context of alleged inconsistencies (Paras 3-7). E) Evidence - Forensic Evidence - Fingerprint and Blood Analysis - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - No fingerprint evidence on the alleged knife was brought on record, and forensic analysis did not link wounds to weapon; out of 28 samples, 15 were inconclusive and blood type of deceased not determined - Appellant contended prosecution failed to prove use of knife beyond reasonable doubt - The court evaluated whether absence of conclusive forensic linkage weakened the prosecution case (Paras 7-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt under Section 302 IPC; whether the dying declaration made by the deceased to P.W.1 was reliable given her serious injuries; whether the testimony of P.W.2 regarding extra-judicial confession and blood-stained clothes was credible without corroboration; whether the presence of the appellant at the scene of crime was established; whether forensic evidence linked the appellant to the weapon and crime.
Law Points
- Murder
- dying declaration
- extra-judicial confession
- circumstantial evidence
- child witness
- proof beyond reasonable doubt
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 313 CrPC
- forensic evidence
