Prosecution Utterly Failed To Prove Any Case Of Premeditation: SC Alters Conviction From Section 302 IPC To Section 304 IPC
|The Supreme Court has altered the conviction of an accused from Section 302 of the IPC to Part I of Section 304 of the IPC observing that the prosecution had utterly failed to prove any case of premeditation.
The Court partly allowed the appeal challenging the Judgment of the Bombay High Court which upheld the conviction and life sentence imposed by the Trial Court on the accused. The accused was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the IPC for allegedly beating and assaulting the deceased on his face and head with a bamboo stick causing his death.
The Bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan held, “As already discussed hereinabove, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove any case of premeditation…In that view of the matter, we find that the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC, therefore, deserves to be altered to one under Part I of Section 304 IPC…We are, therefore, inclined to partly allow the present appeal.”
Senior Advocate D.N. Goburdhun represented the Appellant, while Advocate Siddharth Dharmadhikari appeared for the Respondent.
As per the prosecution, the accused came to a house where the deceased and his wife were present. The accused allegedly started abusing two other people, after which the deceased intervened. The prosecution alleged that the accused later assaulted the deceased with a bamboo stick, resulting in fatal injuries.
The accused argued that the incident was an outcome of a sudden and grave provocation in a quarrel that took place between the deceased and him. It was, therefore, submitted that, in any event, the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC would not be sustainable and would have to be altered to a lesser offence.
The Supreme Court noted that the evidence of the eyewitnesses showed that the accused had come to the house without any weapon and the medical evidence also suggested that “the injuries caused are with the bamboo stick, which is commonly available in a village.”
“The possibility of the deceased following the appellant and an altercation taking place between them and in a sudden fight in the heat of passion the appellant assaulting the deceased cannot be ruled out,” the Court remarked.
The Court also noted that the nature of the injuries sustained by the deceased “would also not show that the appellant had taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.”
Consequently, the Court held, “The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC is altered to the one under Part I of Section 304 IPC…The appellant has already undergone actual imprisonment for a period of more than 9 years and with remission he has undergone the sentence of more than 12 years prior to his release on bail by the order of this Court dated 4th October 2024. We, therefore, find that the said sentence would subserve the ends of justice. Therefore, the appellant is sentenced to the period already undergone.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court partly allowed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Sunny @ Santosh Dharmu Bhosale v. State of Maharashtra (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 878)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Advocate D.N.Goburdhun; AOR Anjani Aiyagari; Advocates J.K. Biswas, Gowri Goburdhun and K. Sriram
Respondent: Advocates Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Bharat Bagla, Aditya Krishna, Preet S. Phanse and Adarsh Dubey; AOR Aaditya Aniruddha Pande