MANI BEN versus STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [2009] 12 S.C.R. 753 · Decided: 07-08-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DALVEER BHANDARI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 12 S.C.R. 753 
MANI BEN 
A 
f 
l 
v. 
STATE OF GUJARAT 
(Criminal Appeal No. 658 of 2002) 
AUGUST 7, 2009 
8 
[DALVEER BHANDARI AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM 
SHARMA, JJ.) 
. 
~\: 
Penal Code, 1860: s. 304 (Part II) - Accused threw 
burning wick made of rags on the deceased -
Since c 
deceased was wearing terylene clothes, it aggravated fire 
causing burn injuries - 60% burn injuries - During course of 
treatment deceased developed septicemia which became 
main cause of her death - Trial court convicted accused 
under s.304 Part II - High Court altered conviction to s.302 -
D 
.Y 
On appeal, Held: From evidence on record it cannot be said 
that accused had intention that action on her part would cause 
death or such bodily injury to deceased sufficient in ordinary 
course of nature to cause death of deceased - Her case was 
covered under s.304 Part II - Conviction order of trial court 
E 
restored. 
~ 
Prosecution case was that on the fateful day, the 
~ 
deceased went to fetch water. When she was returning, 
appellant who was her mother-in-law threw a burning 
F 
wick made of rags on the deceased and thereby set fire 
to the terylene clothes put on by the deceased. She 
underwent treatment and died on eighth day. Trial court 
convicted the appellant u/s. 304 Part II IPC. High Court 
altered convi.ction to s.302 IPC. Hence the present 
G 
appeal. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The post-mortem report of the deceased 
753 
H 
 
754 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 12 S.C.R. 
A was placed on record during the trial and doctor who 
conducted the post-mortem examination was also 
' 
~ 
examined as a witness in the trial. The said documentary 
and oral evidence of the doctor, that he treated the patient 
and also conducted the post-mortem examination made 
B it crystal clear that the deceased remained under 
treatment in hospital and died after 8 days. The deceas~d 
was admitted in the hospital with about 60% burn injuries 
and during the course of treatment developed septicemia, 
which was the main cause of death of the deceased. It 
,I. • 
c is, therefore, established that during the period of 8 days 
the injuries aggravated and worsened to the extent that 
it led to ripening of the injuries and the deceased died due 
to poisonous effect of the injuries. [Para 13] [760-D-F] 
D 
2. It is established from the dying declaration of the 
deceased that she was living separately from her mother-
in-law, the appellant for many years and that on the day 
... 
of incident she had a quarrel with the appellant at her 
house. It is also clear from the evidence on record that 
immediately after the quarrel she along with her daughter 
E came to fetch water and when she was returning, the 
appellant came and threw a burning tonsil on the clothes 
of the deceased. Since the deceased was wearing a 
terylene cloth at that relevant point of time, it aggravated 
" 
the fire which caused the burn injuries. There is also 
F evidence on record to prove and establish that the action 
of the appellant in throwing the burning tonsil was 
preceded by a quarrel between the deceased and the 
appellant. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said 
that the appellant had the intention that such action on 
G her part would cause the death or such bodily injury to 
the deceased, which was sufficient in the ordinary course 
J 
of nature to cause the death of the deceased. Therefore, 
the case cannot be said to be covered under clause (4) 
of Section 300 of IPC. The case of the appellant is 
H 
,_
MANIBEN v. STATE OF GUJARAT 
755 
; " 
covered under Section 304 Part II of IPC. [Para 14] [760-
A 
G-H; 761-A-C] 
3. The view taken by the trial court was a cogent and 
plausible view and, therefore, the conviction and 
sentence imposed by the trial court is justified. 
B 
Considering the totality of the circumstances and the fact 
that the appellant is of 85 years df age and had undergone 
-->: 
the sentence imposed by the trial court under the 
provisions of Section 304 Part II of IPC, the conviction and 
sentence of the appellant imposed by the High Court is c 
set aside and the judgment and order passed by the trial 
court is restored. [Para 15] [761-D-F] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
No. 658 of 2002. 
·"' 
D 
' 
From the Judgment & Order dated 03.04.2001 ofthe High 
Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 1198 
of 1995. 
M.R. Challa, Lalit Chauhan, Somnadari Gaud, Pallavi 
E 
Sharma (for Parekh & Co.) for the

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