LexSHAIKH MAJID AND ANR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 1 S.C.R. 964 -:r- SHAIKH MAJID AND ANR. A v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 2008) JANUARY 21, 2008 B [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ.] ) -+ Penal Code, 1860: s. 300, Exception 4, 304 (Part-1) - Sudden fight resulting c in death of one and serious injuries to others - Deceased, PW-4 and other villagers performing pooja in temple - Accused persons and large number of persons from mosque adjacent to the temple started pelting stones exhorting them to leave the place immediately as they had to offer namaz - Accused persons assaulted PW-4 and others with knives - D ' Causing serious injuries to many and death of one - _. Conviction by trial court under s.302 r.w. s.34 - Affirmed by High Court - On appeal, Held: Considering background facts and nature of weapon used i.e. small knife, the appropriate conviction would be under s.304 Part I and not s.302 - E Accordingly conviction altered. s.302 -Applicability of, when single blow given. Criminal trial: ·-·-' Non-explanation of injuries on accused - Effect on F prosecution case. Words and phrases: "fight', 'sudden fight' and 'undue advantage' - Meaning of - In the context of s.300, Exception 4 /PC. G '"I-, The prosecution case was that the first informant PW- 4 and about 200 villagers were performing pooja in a temple on the event of Deshahra festival. After pooja, they 964 H 965 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 1 S.C.R. A entered the gate of village and went to the Ram and Maruti ..., .... temples for offering their prayers. At that time, about 250- 300 people from mosque, adjacent to Ram temple started pelting stones at them. While pelting stones they were exhorting that it was time for offering prayer and they B should leave the place immediately. 32 accused persons· along with 200-250 persons assaulted them with sticks, stones, knives etc. The assault was on the people r belonging to Hindu religion. PW-4 was assaulted by • accused no.1 and 26 with knives. Other persons also c sustained serious injuries. One person died. A case was registered against accused persons under ss.307, 147, 148, 149 and 323 IPC. The trial court convicted appellants under s.302 r.w. s.34 IPC and also under s.324 IPC, which was affirmed by the High Court. D In appeal to this Court, appellants contended that there were injuries on the accused which were not 1 ~ explained by the prosecution and in alternate, s.302 IPC would not attract to facts of the case and Exception 4 to s.300 IPC would apply as there was only one blow and E that too in the course of sudden quarrel. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Non-explanation of the injuries on the accused by the prosecution may assume greater F importance where the defence gives a version which /. competes in probability with that of the prosecution. But . where the evidence is clear, cogent and creditworthy and where the court can distinguish the truth from falsehood, the mere fact that the injuries are not explained by the G prosecution cannot by itself be a sole basis to reject such evidence, and consequently, the whole case. Much ,....,. depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. [Para 9] [972-F-H; 973-A] 1.2. Non-explanation of injuries by the prosecution H will not affect the prosecution case where injuries SHAIKH MAJID AND ANR. v. STATE OF 966 MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. sustained by the accused are minor and superficial or A r where the evidence is so clear and cogent, so independent and disinterested, so probable, consistent and creditworthy, that it outweighs the effect of the omission on the part of the prosecution to explain the injuries. When the prosecution comes with a definite case B that the offence has been committee! by the accused and proves its case beyond any reasonable doubt, it does ' not become necessary for the prosecution to again ~ explain how and under what circumstances injuries have been inflicted on the person of the accused. It is more so c I when the injuries are simple or superficial in nature. [Para 1 OJ [973-8, F-G] Ram/agan Singh v. State of Bihar (1973) 3 SCC 881; Hare Krishna Singh v. State of Bihar (1988) 2 SCC 98 - relied on. D ¥ Mohar Rai v. State of Bihar AIR (1968) SC 1281; Lakshmi ... Singh v. State of Bihar (1976) 4 SCC 394; Vijayee Singh v. State of U.P (1990) 3 SCC 190 - referred to. 2.1. Exception 4 to s.300 IPC deals with a case of E prosecu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.