KUSHA LAXMAN WAGHMARE versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [2014] 9 S.C.R. 505 · Decided: 02-09-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 9 S.C.R. 505 
KUSHA LAXMAN WAGHMARE 
V. 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
(Criminal Appeal No.1414 of 2008) 
SEPTEMBER 02, 2014 
[M.Y. EQBAL AND PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 304 Part-II - Punishment for 
culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Prosecution 
case that husband killed his wife by hitting her severely with 
C 
wooden stick -
Conviction uls. 302 and sentence of 
imprisonment for life by courts below - Held: On basis of 
evidence of prosecution witnesses, extra-judicial confession 
of the husband and medical evidence, case not fit for 
conviction u/s. 302 - Since there is no evidence to show that D 
accused had beaten the deceased with an intention to cause 
her death, conviction altered to s. 304 Part II and accused 
sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years, which he 
has already served, accused enlarged on bail. 
According to the prosecution case, the appellant-
E 
husband severely beat his wife with wooden stick and 
she succumbed to her injuries. The courts below 
convicted the appellant u/s. 302 IPC and sentenced him 
to undergo imprisonment for life. Hence, the instant 
appeal. 
F 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. There is no eye-witness to the 
occurrence. But the accused-appellant made extra-
judicial confession before PW-1 and PW-2. No 
G 
explanation was o,ffered by the accused under Section 
313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The post mortem 
report fully corro.borated the injuries caused to the 
505 
H 
506 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 9 S.C.R. 
A deceased by the appellant with wooden stick. All the 
three witnesses viz .. PW-1, PW-5 and PW-6, proved the 
prosecution case. Thus, after analysing the entire 
evidence, it was not a fit case where conviction could be 
sustained under Section 302, IPC. The weapon used by 
s the appellant was a wooden stick and as per the 
prosecution case, the deceased was severely beaten by 
the said stick. As a result thereof, she died. There is no 
cogent evidence to show that the appellant had beaten 
the deceased with an intention to cause her death. In 
c such circumstances, the conviction of the appellant 
under Section 304 Part-II, IPC would be just and proper, 
thus, the conviction of the appellant is altered to Section 
304 Part-II, IPC and he is sentenced to undergo rigorous 
imprisonment for ten years, which he has already served, 
0 
the appellant is\enlarged on bail. [Para 10, 11,12,13) [508-
C-H; 509-A-B] 
CRIMINAL AP~ELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No.1414 of 2008. 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 09.01.2004 of the 
High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 
385/1995. 
F 
Jai Prakash Narayan Gupta (A.C.) for the Appellant. 
Asha Gopalan Nair for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Aggrieved by the judgment and order 
dated 09.01.2004 passed by the High Court of judicature at 
G Bombay passed in Criminal Appeal· No.385 of 1999, this jail 
appeal by special ·leave has been filed by the accused. By the 
impugned judgment; the High 'Court affirmed and upheld the 
judgment of conviction. passed by the Sessions Judge of 
Raigad at Alibag in Sessions Case No. 127 of 1998 and 
sentenced the accused-appellant to undergo imprisonment for 
H life and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- with default .clause. 
KUSHA LAXMAN WAGHMARE v. STATE OF 
507 
MAHARASHTRA [M.Y. EQBAL, J.] 
2. The allegation as per the prosecution case is that 
A 
appellant killed his wife Anusuya by means of wooden bar, 
hitting her very severely on the chest and at the back. Because 
of severe beating, there was internal bleeding and as a result 
thereof, she died. A First Information Report (for short, 'FIR') 
was lodged and after usual investigation, police submitted the 
B 
charge-sheet against the appe.llant under Section 302 of the 
Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC'). 
3. PW-1 Devram Satu Waghmare who was police Patil of 
village Pilosari, deposed that in his absence the appellant 
visited his house and made a voluntary confession to his wife 
C 
PW-2 Sunita that he had killed his wife. On getting the 
information, PW-1 immediately reached the spot of incident 
and there he found the appellant sitting beside the dead body 
of his wife. The appellant also narrated the story to PW-1 and 
confessed that he killed his wife. PW-1 then telephoned the 
D 
police station from where the inspector of police arrived and 
arrested the accused. 
4. The prosecution examined PW-2 Suni

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.