Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal against the acquittal of two appellants in a murder case where the deceased was assaulted by four individuals. On the night of November 2-3, 2015, the deceased, Vilas Babusa Gawande, was attacked while his wife, Anita, was preparing food. She heard her husband shouting that he was being assaulted by four men, two of whom were identified as Manoj Puran Badge and Puran Sakharam Bagde, while the appellants, Sanjay Puran Bagde and Rajratna @ Nandu Bagde, restrained him. The motive for the attack was alleged to be an evil eye cast by the deceased on Manoj's wife. The FIR was registered, and the trial court convicted the first two accused while acquitting the appellants. The High Court later reversed this acquittal, finding that the appellants had a common intention with the others, as they were present at the scene armed with weapons. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the presence of all accused with weapons and their actions during the assault indicated a shared intention to commit the crime. The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction of the appellants under Section 34 IPC, stating that their role in restraining the victim did not absolve them of liability. The court concluded that the trial court had applied an erroneous principle of law in acquitting the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Common Intention - Shared Intention in Commission of Offence - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 34 - The court examined whether the appellants, who held the deceased while others inflicted injuries, shared a common intention to commit murder. It was held that their presence with weapons and participation in restraining the victim established a common intention, justifying their conviction under Section 34 IPC (Paras 11-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants shared a common intention to commit murder despite not inflicting the fatal injuries.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's conviction of the appellants under Section 34 IPC, stating that their actions during the assault demonstrated a shared common intention to commit murder.
Law Points
- Common intention
- Section 34 IPC
- constructive liability
- premeditated intention
- eye witness reliability
