LexKASAM ABDULLA HAFIZ versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A KASAM ABDULLA HAFIZ v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DECEMBER 4, 1997 B (G.N. RAY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, J.J.) Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 304 and 324-Accused hit the victim on abdomen by a brick C and stabbed him in the stomach-Victim died after JO day.1~Accused also stabbed hand of another who was discharged after first aid-Sessions Judge convicted accused under Sections 302 and 307 /PC for murder and attempt to murder and sentenced him to life-However, High Court reduced the sentence and convicted accused under Section 304 Pa1t 1, !PC and Section 324 /PC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and causing hwt by D dangerous weapon, respectively, taking into consideration the sudden fight and size of knife used - Plea in cross appeals that no explanation of injuries on accused by prosecution--Held - injuries simple-Not such that must have been noticed and explained by witnesses-Their non-explanation not fatal to prosecution case-In any case surviving victim gave reasonable explanation. E F G Section JOO-Right of self defence---Not sustainable where accused examined as witness but did not say anything about apprehending giievous injury to himself-Nor anything on record to indicate existence of such apprehension. Sentence-Conviction under Section 304 Pa1t I IPC-Held-Sentence of only 5 years R.!. ordinarily not proper-Howevel'---Conside1ing reasons given by High Court-Not interfered with. Constitution of India, 1950 : Article 13fr--Nonnally this court does not look illlo concurrent findings of evidence-In view of contentions raised, it carefully scrutinized evidence of eye witnesses----Found evidence of Pfl12 and fW-3 to be t1ustworthy and held prosecution case proved beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution case, based on statements of PW2 and PW3, was H that the accused and PW-3 were advocates attached to the chambers of a 168 KASAMABDULLAHAFIZ v. STATE 169 particular senior advocate and living in the same building. When the A accused became an assistant public prosecutor he left the chambers of the senior advocate. The relationship between the accused and PW-3 was cordial. However, in March 1990 PW-3 complained to the District Judge that the accused had spread false rumours about her that PW-3 had taken Rs. 50,000 in the name of the Additional Sessions Judge before whom PW-3 B had argued a criminal case. In a meeting called by the District Judge, the accused stated that he had not said that money had been collected in the name of a judge but had merely stated that PW-3 had taken Rs. 50,000 from her client. After the meeting, PW-3 was very agitated and on reaching home, narrated the incident to her father. PW-2, the so~ of her senior also happened to come to the house of PW-3 and heard PW-3 narrating the C incident. Just then PW-3 heard that the accused was downstairs and she rushed down, followed by her father, the deceased, and PW-2. PW-3 confronted the accused, who was sitting in the car, about the false rumours he was spreading, upon which the accused rush 0ed towards PW-3, but, her father pulled her back. The accused then threw a brick towards the father D of PW-3 which hit his abdomen and thereafter, pulled out a pen knife and stabbed him in the abdomen. The second blow missed the victim and in the meanwhile, PW-2 c;mght the hands of the accused and pushed him against the compound wall. The accused however, managed to stab PW-2 on his left hand and then drove away. PW-2, after receiving first aid, gave an FIR in the afternoon on 19th March 1990. The injured father of PW-3 was taken to doctor, PW-7, who opined that an emergency operation was necessary and thereafter, since his condition was serious, he was, taken to Bombay, where he died on E 29.3.90. F The defense version, based on the complaint lodged by the accused and the evidence of the accused was that PW-3 and her family, including her maid servant, rushed down and started assaulting the accused while he was still in the car. When the accused came out of the car, the maid servant G handed a knife to PW-2. While PW-2 was attacking the accused with the knife, he pushed the deceased due to which the deceased received injuries, after which the accused drove away. He narrated the incident to the District Judge who advised him to inform the police. An FIR was also registered by the police on the Complaint of the accused. The counter case, however, ended in ac11uittal. H 170 SUPRE
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.