LexRANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 3 S.C.R. 526 . ' A RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 2002) B FEBRUARY 27, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR ' GANGUL Y, JJ.] . - Penal Code, 1860 - s.304 Part II r/w s.149 -Assault with c swords and axes - Death due to cumulative effect of the injuries caused - Held: Accused-appellants liable to be convicted u/s.304 Part-II r/w s.149. According to the prosecution, owing to a previous D enmity, the accused-appellants assaulted PW4's father with swords and axes which resulted in his death. I- Placing reliance on the evidence of PW 4, 5 and 6, the Courts below convicted the appellants in terms of s.304, Part II r/w s.149 IPC. Hence the present appeal. E Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The First Information Report was lodged within a very short time. The alleged occurrence took -- place around 2.45 p.m. and the FIR was lodged at 7.15 ~ F p.m. at the Police Station which was situated at about 22 K.M. from the place of incident. The evidence of PWs 4,5 and 6 clearly established the complicity of the accused persons. Added to that, as rightly noted by the High Court the medical evidence is not at total variance with the l G ocular evidence. [Para 5] [530-D-F] ~ Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR " ' fl. 1983 SC 484, referred to. 2. In the instant case the doctor has categorically H 526 .... , RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF 527 MAHARASHTRA stated that the cumulative effe,ct of the injuries was the A cause of death. That being so, the judgment of the High Court affirming that of the trial Court cannot be said to be in any way unsustainable. [Para 6] (531-8-C] Case Law Reference: AIR 1983 SC 484 referred to Para 5 CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 2002. B From the Judgment/Order dated 16.8.2001 passed by C the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 441 of 1985. Shivaji M. Jadhav for the Appellant. Ravindra Keshavrao for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is D to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court E upholding the conviction of the appellants for offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). Two appeals were disposed of by a common order. Criminal Appeal No.441 of 1985 was filed by the present appellants questioning their F conviction while Criminal Appeal No.608 of 1985 was filed by the State of Maharashtra contending that the appropriate conviction should have been under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. 2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: The informant Murlidhar Krishna Ronge (PW-4) is the son G of Krishna (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). At the time of the incident, the informant, Manik Suryabhan Dhas (PW-5), Vasant Bhagwan Dhas (PW-6) and the appellants H 528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 3 S.C.R. A were living in Village Dhas Pimpalgaon within the limits of Taluka Barshi, District Solapur. The appellants are closely interconnected. Appellants Rangnath and Ganpati are brothers and appellant Govardhan is their relation. Appellants Narsing and Dattu are also brothers. B There was enmity between the deceased, the informant on one hand and the appellants on the other. There were two pieces of land known by the name of Vanjechi Patti and Chinchechi Patti. The former was admeasuring two acres and the latter one- and-half acres. The land known as Chinchechi C Patti originally belonged to one Atmaram Ronge and was purchased in auction by the deceased Krishna. After purchasing it, the deceased started cultivating it. One Dnyandeo Ronge, who was a tenant of the said land, had given up his rights. Appellant Govardhan's niece was married D to the son of the said Dnyandeo Govardhan and Dnyandeo wanted that the land known as Chinchechi Patti should be sold without consideration. The deceased, on account of threats of Govardhan, executed sale deed of that land in favour of Dnyandeo. About one-and-half years prior to the incident, E the marriage of the informant Murlidhar was settled with the daughter of one Vithal, resident of village Dhas Pimpalgaon. The appellants were irked by this because they did not want the deceased to settle the marriage of informant with Vithal's daughter. The
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.