LexDATTATRAYA versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 2 S.C.R. 989 : 2024 INSC 167 Dattatraya v. The State of Maharashtra Criminal Appeal No. 666 of 2012 01 February 2024 [Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the courts below were justified in convicting the appellant u/ss. 302 and 316 IPC and sentencing to undergo life imprisonment and 10 years of R.I. respectively along with fine, for causing death of his wife as also the child she was bearing by pouring kerosene on her and then setting her on fire. Headnotes Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 304 Part II and 316 – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide – Prosecution case that on the fateful night the husband in an inebriated state, picked a fight with his nine months pregnant wife and then poured kerosene on her, as a result she sustained in 98% burn injuries and subsequently died – She also gave birth to still born child – Dying declaration recorded – Maternal grand mother of the deceased witness to the incident – Conviction of the appellant u/ss. 302 and 316 and sentenced to life imprisonment and 10 years of R.I. respectively along with fine by the courts below – Correctness: Held: Prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt regarding the incident – Maternal grand mother of the deceased witnessed the incident – She along with the maternal aunt clearly established the facts – Even though PW 1 who recorded dying declaration was declared hostile, there is sufficient evidence to prove that it was the appellant who had poured kerosene on the deceased which led to the burn injuries and the death of the deceased and the child she was bearing – Fact that the deceased gave birth to a stillborn child on the next day while she was still alive and the death was caused by the act of the appellant, makes a case u/s. 316 – From every available 990 [2024] 2 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports evidence placed by the prosecution, it is a case where a sudden fight took place between the husband and wife – Deceased at that time was carrying a pregnancy of nine months and it was the act of pouring kerosene on the deceased that resulted in the fire and the subsequent burn injuries and the ultimate death of the deceased – Said act at the hands of the appellant would be covered under the fourth exception given u/s 300 – Act of the appellant was not premeditated, but is a result of sudden fight and quarrel in the heat of passion – Thus, it would be a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder u/s. 304 Part II in as much as, though the accused had knowledge of the consequences of the act he was committing, yet there was no intention to cause death – Findings of s. 302 converted to that of s. 304 Part II and the accused sentenced to 10 years of R.I – Since the appellant has already undergone incarceration for more than 10 years, he be released forthwith from the jail unless required in some other offence. [Paras 11, 12, 14, 17-21] Case Law Cited Kalu Ram v. State of Rajasthan, (2000) 10 SCC 324 – referred to. List of Acts Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide; Dying declaration; Life imprisonment; Culpable homicide not amounting to murder; Knowledge of the consequences of the act; Intention to cause death; Premeditated act; Sudden fight and quarrel in the heat of passion; Prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; Evidence; Witnesses; Sufficient proof; Burn injuries; Incarceration. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.666 of 2012 From the Judgment and Order dated 23.11.2010 of the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad in CRLA No.6 of 2009 [2024] 2 S.C.R. 991 Dattatraya v. The State of Maharashtra Appearances for Parties Sudhanshu S . Choudhari, Sr. Adv., Ms. Rucha Pande, M Veera Ragavan, Ms. Gautami Yadav, Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, M. A. Chinnasamy, Advs. for the Appellant. Bharat Bagla, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Sourav Singh, Aditya Krishna, Ms. Raavi Sharma, Adarsh Dubey, Advs. for the Respondent. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Order This appeal arises out of the final judgment and order dated 23.11.2010 passed by the Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 06/2009 whereby the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 316 of the Indian Penal Code
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.