LexSUDAM PRABHAKAR ACHAT versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 897 : 2025 INSC 378 Sudam Prabhakar Achat v. The State of Maharashtra (Criminal Appeal No. 641 of 2024) 21 March 2025 [B.R. Gavai* and Augustine George Masih, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose as to whether the conviction u/s.302 IPC could be converted into s.304 Part I or Part II IPC. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.304 Part I, 300 exception IV, 302 – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – Alteration of conviction to a lesser offence – Testimony of related witnesses – Reliability – Quarrel on account of previous enimity between the accused persons and the deceased who were brothers – Upon confrontation, the co-accused and his son-appellant became aggressive, and the co-accused armed with axe and the appellant armed with stick assaulted the deceased and his son-complainant, resulting in injuries to them – Deceased succumbed to his injuries the same night and the complainant succumbed to his injuries, a month later – Order of conviction and sentence of the accused u/ss.302/34 and 324/34 by the courts below – Correctness: Held: No reason to interfere with the finding that the death of the deceased was homicidal, and it was the appellant along with the co-accused who caused injuries to the deceased resulting in his death – All the witnesses are related to the deceased – Merely because the witnesses are relatives of the deceased and as such are interested witnesses, that alone cannot be a ground to discard their testimony – Testimony of such witnesses to be scrutinized with greater caution and circumspection – Possibility of a quarrel taking place on account of previous enmity between the accused persons and the deceased; and in a sudden fight in the heat of the moment, the appellant along with the co-accused assaulting the deceased cannot be ruled out – Weapons used are stick and * Author 898 [2025] 3 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports the blunt side of the axe, easily available in any agricultural field – Thus, cannot be said that there was any premeditation – Appellant is alleged to have used the stick whereas the co-accused is said to have used the blunt side of the axe – If their intention was to kill the deceased, no reason as to why the co-accused would not have used the sharp side of the axe – Nature of injury and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses would also not show that the appellant had taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner – Thus, the case would not fall under the ambit of s.302 and the appellant is entitled to benefit of exception IV of s.300 – Conviction u/s.302 converted to Part I of s.304 – Appellant having already undergone the sentence of 6 years 10 months, sentenced to the period already undergone. [Paras 7-15] List of Acts Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Testimony of witnesses; Previous enimity; Post-Mortem Report; Evidence of the Medical Officer; Homicidal; Related witnesses; Interested witnesses; Testimony; Premeditation; Blunt side of the axe; Undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner; Benefit of exception IV of s.300 IPC; Conviction u/s.302 converted to Part I of s.304 IPC. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 641 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 10.08.2021 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in CRLA No. 88 of 2013 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: Ms. Deeplaxmi Subhash Matwankar, Dr. Ravindra Chingale, Ms. Manreet Kaur. Advs. for the Respondent: Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Amlaan Kumar, Jatin Dhamija, Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj. [2025] 3 S.C.R. 899 Sudam Prabhakar Achat v. The State of Maharashtra Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment B.R. Gavai, J. 1. The present appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 10th August 2021, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 2013, whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellant (Accused No.2) thereby affirming the judgment and order dated 5th December 2012 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Malegaon, District Nashik (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”) in Sessions Case No.76 of 2009 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for li
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.