LexYASHWANT ETC. versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 654 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 12 S.C.R. YASHWANT ETC. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (Criminal Appeal No(s). 385-386 of 2008) SEPTEMBER 4, 2018 [N. V. RAMANA AND MOHAN M. SHANTAGOUDAR, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 304 and ss.330,354,355, 342 r/ w. s.34 – Prosecution case was that the police officials took victim into custody in order to extract information regarding a ‘loot’ in a hotel – It was alleged that police officials caused injuries to the victim in furtherance of extracting confession which led to his death in police custody – Trial Court acquitted all accused police officials (A-1 to 10) u/s. 302 of IPC but convicted them u/ss.330, 354, 355, 342 r/w.34 of IPC – High Court acquitted (A-1 to 9) of the offences punishable u/ss.354,355, 342 r/w.34 of IPC, however, upheld their conviction u/s.330 of IPC and acquitted A-10 of all the offences – Consequently, accused (A-1 to 9) were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years u/s.330 of IPC – In appeal before Supreme Court , State sought to press for charges u/s.304 Part-II of IPC, in case s.302 of IPC was not made out – Meanwhile A-1 passed away – Held: Both Courts below had taken a concurrent view that the crime did not amount to culpable homicide as the cause of death was asphyxiation and there was nothing on record to prove that the injuries were the cause of the death – It was on record that injuries noted in the post mortem indicated that the nature of these injuries were not grievous – Rather, it was a case wherein victim-deceased died of asphyxiation due to contents of his vomit, hours later from the time when the injury was inflicted, which was an independent reason for cause of death – The casual link between the injuries caused to the deceased by the erring officers and the death was not connected, therefore, s.299 of IPC not attracted – Accordingly, there is no question of attracting s.302 or s.304 IPC – As police in this case are violators of law, who had primary responsibility to protect and uphold law, therefore, the term of sentence of A-2 to A-9 modified to the maximum imposable period u/s.330 of IPC i.e., seven years of rigorous imprisonment. 654 [2018] 12 S.C.R. 654 A B C D E F G H 655 Penal Code, 1860 – s.299 – Culpable homicide – Held: Causation is an important ingredient to determine as to whether a person commits culpable homicide in the first place – Causation simply means “causal relationship between conduct and result” – s.299 indicates two types of causations, one the factual causation and the second the legal causation – Coming to the factual causation, it is a matter of fact as to whether the action of the accused caused death of the person – But the second aspect concerns itself, whether the death can be sufficiently imputed to the accused’s action as being responsible legally. Maxim – Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus – discussed. Doctrines/Principles – Principle of ‘Take their victim as they find them’ – discussed. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. It is a matter of record that both the courts below have taken a concurrent view that the crime in question did not amount to culpable homicide as the cause of death was asphyxiation and there was nothing on record to prove that the injuries were the cause of the death. It is well settled that in order to be called a murder, it needs to be culpable homicide in the first place, that is to say all murders are culpable homicides, but the vice versa may not true in all cases. [Para 16] [664-H; 665-A-B] 2. Under Section 299 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 causation is an important ingredient to determine as to whether a person commits culpable homicide in the first place. Causation simply means “causal relationship between conduct and result”. Now, what need to be assessed is whether the contentions of the parties could stand the scrutiny of the law of the land. Section 299 indicates two types of causations, one the factual causation and the second the legal causation. Coming to the factual causation, it is a matter of fact as to whether the action of the accused caused death of the person. But the second aspect concerns itself, whether the death can be sufficiently imputed to the accused’s action as being responsible legally. This case turns on the second leg of causal relationship wherein, could the injuries caused by YASHWANT ETC. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA A B C D E F G H 656 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 12 S.C.R. the police officers be sufficiently impu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.