LexWAMAN & ORS. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2011] 6 S.C.R. 1072 WAMAN & ORS. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal No. 364 of 2009) JUNE 29, 2011 [P. SATHASIVAM AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: c ss. 3021149, 4471149, 147 and 148 - Conviction under - Long standing land and water dispute between parties - Comment passed by A 1 on two victims resulting in quarrel between the parties - A2 to A 13 armed with weapons rushed to the place of incident and assaulted the victims - Victims 0 later succumbed to their injuries - Incident witnessed by PW 1 to 4 (family members of victims) - Accused arrested and weapons recovered at their instance - Conviction of A 1 to A6 and A 16 ulss. 3021149, 4471149, 147 and 148 by courts below - Acquittal of the remaining accused - On appeal, held: E Prosecution has established long standing land and water dispute among the deceased and the accused - Evidence of eye-witnesses PWs. 1-4 (family members of victims) are acceptable - Contradictions are trivial in nature and not related to the major overt act attributed to each accused - Medical evidence corroborate the assertion of prosecution F witnesses- Though no weapon was recovered from A-12, the evidence of PWs. 1-4, weapons seized from various accused, · incised wounds on different body parts coupled with medical evidence clearly implicate A-12 also in the commission of murder- It is not the case of solitary blow but number of blows G by various accused thus, the intention and knowledge to cause death has been amply demonstrated and proved - Thus, there is no error or infirmity or valid legal ground for interference in the order passed by the courts below - Evidence - Witnesses. H 1072 WAMAN & ORS. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 1073 s. 149 - Nature of - When attracted - Held: In order to A attract s. 149 it must be shown that the incriminating act was done to accomplish the common object of unlawful assembly - It must be within the knowledge of the other members as one likely to be committed in 'prosecution of common object - If members of the assembly knew or were aware of the B likelihood of a particular offence being committed in prosecution of a common object, they would be liable for the same u/s. 149 - Criminal law - Common object. Witnesses - Related witnesses - Credibility of - Held: Relationship is not a factor to affect the credibility of a witness C - If the evidence of a witness is found to be consistent and true, the fact of he being a relative cannot discredit his evidence - Courts have to scrutinize the evidence of a related witness meticulously and carefully. Criminal trial - Non-explanation of injuries sustained by deceased or injury on accused - Effect of, on prosecution case - Held: Ordinarily, the prosecution is not obliged to explain each minor injury on an accused even though caused D in the course of occurrence, however, if the prosecution fails E to explain a grievous injury on one of the accused persons, established to have been caused in the course of the same occurrence then the prosecution case is looked at with a little suspicion - If the evidence is clear, cogent and creditworthy then non-explanation of certain injuries sustained by the F deceased or injury on the accused ipso facto cannot be the basis to discard the entire prosecution case. According to the prosecution, there was a long standing land and water dispute between the parties. On the fateful day, 'AB', 'SB' and their family members (PW1, G PW2 and PW3) were working in the fields and A1 was also present nearby. A1 passed a comment on 'SB' and 'AB' which resulted in a quarrel between them. Thereafter, A2 to A13 armed with weapons rushed to the H 107 4 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 6 S.C.R. . A place of incident and assaulted 'SB and 'AB', and as a result 'SB' and 'AB' succumbed to their injuries. The accused persons were arrested and various weapons were recovered at their instance. The trial court acquitted A-7, A-9, A-10 and A-11 of the various offences punishable B under the Penal Code. A-1 to A-6 and A-12 were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302/149, 447/ 149, 147 and 148 IPC and sentenced accordingly. However, A1 to AG and A12 were acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 323/149 IPC. The trial of A-13, c juvenile offender was forwarded to the juvenile court. A- 8 died after framing of charge and trial against her got abated. A~grieved, A-1 to A-6 and A-12
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.