Partly allowed

Pravinkumar Sartaj Bahadur Bhartiya v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC21 Aug 2013APEAL/881/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal partly. The appellant was originally convicted under Section 302 IPC for stabbing a deceased. The court recharacterized the offence as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC due to a sudden altercation and reduced the sentence to eight years rigorous imprisonment.

What did the court decide?

Setting aside conviction under Section 302 IPC and sentencing appellant for Section 304 Part I IPC with Eight years rigorous imprisonment.

Pravinkumar Sartaj Bahadur Bhartiya Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 881 OF 2010

¶5

Pravinkumar Sartaj Bahadur Bhartiya	]
Age - 45 Years, Occ. - Business,	]
R/at Brahmand Society - Phase 4,	]
Bldg. No. C-1/702, Azadnagar, Thane (W).	]
At present in Central Jail, Nasik.	] Appellant (Org. Accused)

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra ]

¶8

(Through Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane). ] Respondent

¶9

Mrs. Sarojini Upadhyay, Advocate appointed for the Appellant

¶10

Mrs. V.R. Bhonsale, APP for the State

¶11

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &

¶12

MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ

¶13

DATE : AUGUST 21, 2013.

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] :-

¶15

The appellant-original accused has preferred this appeal

¶16

against the judgment and order dated 21.09.2010 passed by the

¶17

Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No. 279 of

¶18

By the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions

¶19

Pg 1 of 10

¶20

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶21

Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/- in default, RI for 6 months.

¶22

2.1 The appellant is the resident of Flat No. 702 in Brahmand

¶23

Society - Phase 4, Thane. Deceased Sanjeev Pansare was residing in the same building in flat No. 601. On 15.05.2006, deceased Sanjeev gave a contract to the complainant PW 1 Kanhaiyalal of renovation and repairs to his flat.

¶24

2.2 The incident occurred on 16.05.2006. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal

¶25

brought 35 to 40 gunny bags containing plaster of paris. Deceased Sanjeev instructed PW 1 Kanhaiyalal to store the same

¶26

on terrace. Accordingly, these gunny bags were taken to the terrace. While shifting the gunny bags, some powder of plaster of paris spilled on 7th floor where the appellant was residing. The appellant instructed PW 1 Kanhaiyalal to take all the said gunny bags to the flat of the deceased. Accordingly, PW 1 Kanhaiyalal

¶27

stored all the gunny bags in the flat of the deceased.

¶28

Pg 2 of 10

¶29

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶30

2.3 The incident took place on 16.05.2006 at around 05.00 p.m. Deceased Sanjeev returned home from work at around 04.30 p.m. He along with PW 1 Kanhaiyalal and other labours started cleaning

¶31

the floor where the power of plaster of paris was spilled. Meanwhile, the appellant came out of his flat and started abusing the deceased. In reply, the deceased also abused him. Wife of

¶32

the appellant also came out of his house. A quarrel started between them. Then the deceased Sanjeev started going downwards to his flat. At that time, the appellant brought a knife from the kitchen of his house and assaulted the deceased with a knife in the chest and stomach. The deceased lost his control. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal brought him to his flat and gave alarm to the residents in the building. He also called the friend of the deceased. The deceased was shifted to Civil Hospital, Thane. There he was declared dead. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal informed the incident to the police at Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane. As per his statement, FIR was recorded and the offence was registered as C.R. No. 172 of 2006 of Kapurbawadi Police Station,

¶33

Thane under Sections 302 and 504 read with 34 of IPC initially

¶34

Pg 3 of 10

¶35

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶36

against the accused and his wife Kamni. Police drew inquest panchnama in present of panchas (Exh. 41). Spot panchnama was drawn at Exh. 73. Police immediately arrested the appellant under arrest and seized the clothes of the appellant under arrestcum-seizure panchnama Exh. 24 on the same day. Police recorded the statements of the witnesses. Postmortem on the

¶37

dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW 3 Dr. Patil. Postmortem notes were produced at Exh. 64 showing that the deceased died due to stab injuries on his chest. On completion of investigation, the police filed the charge sheet in the Court of Magistrate. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Charge were framed against the appellant and his wife Kamni under Sections 302 and 504 r/w 34 of IPC. Accused Kamni was discharged vide order dated 02.01.2009. The trial proceeded only against the present appellant and it was concluded in the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC, hence, this appeal.

¶38

The case is based on the evidence of the sole eye witness

¶39

Pg 4 of 10

¶40

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶41

i.e PW 1 Kanhaiyalal. His evidence is completely reliable and

¶42

credit worthy, hence believed. PW 1 Kanhaiylal has stated that On

¶43

15.05.2006, deceased Sanjeev gave him a contract for renovation and repairs to his flat. The incident occurred on 16.05.2006. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal brought 35 to 40 gunny bags containing plaster of paris. Deceased Sanjeev instructed him to

¶44

store the same on terrace. Accordingly, these gunny bags were taken to the terrace. While shifting the gunny bags, some powder of plaster of paris spilled on 7th floor where the appellant was residing. The appellant instructed PW 1 Kanhaiyalal to take all the said gunny bags to the flat of the deceased. Accordingly, PW 1 Kanhaiyalal stored all the gunny bags in the flat of the deceased. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal further stated that the deceased Sanjeev returned home from work at around 04.30 p.m. He along with PW

¶45

1 Kanhaiyalal and other labourers started clearing the floor where the power of plaster of paris was spilled. Meanwhile, the appellant came out of his flat and started abusing the deceased.

¶46

In reply, the deceased also abused him. Wife of the appellant also

¶47

came out of his house. A quarrel started between them. Then the

¶48

Pg 5 of 10

¶49

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶50

deceased Sanjeev started going downwards to his flat. At that

¶51

time, the appellant brought a knife from the kitchen of his house

¶52

and assaulted the deceased with a knife in the chest and stomach. The deceased collapsed. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal brought him to his flat and gave alarm to the residents in the building. He also called the friend of the deceased. The deceased was shifted to

¶53

Civil Hospital, Thane. There he was declared dead. PW 1 Kanhaiyalal informed the incident to the police at Kapurbawadi Police Station, Thane.

¶54

The evidence of PW 1 Kanhaiyalal shows that he has taken

¶55

quick steps to help the deceased and he immediately reported the incident to the police. The FIR was lodged at 06.30 p.m. on the same day. His evidence comes in a natural flow and remained unshaken in cross-examination. We do not find any reason to doubt the presence of PW 1 Kanhaiyalal at the time of assault and his deposition about further steps taken by him. The police took

¶56

quick steps and drew inquest panchnama. They arrested the

¶57

appellant on the same day and seized his clothes at the time of

¶58

Pg 6 of 10

¶59

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶60

his arrest. Thus, arrest-cum-seizure panchnama was drawn in presence of panchas which is at Exh. 54. Thus, the evidence unfolds that within a span of 4-5 hours from the time of assault, the substantial investigation was completed.

¶61

PW 3 Dr. Patil has conducted the postmortem on the dead

¶62

body of the deceased. He found three stab wounds which are on the chest and left arm and one incised wound over left arm and forearm. He noticed that the right lung was collapsed, right hilum was punctured and covered with blood, pericardium was ruptured. So also, right side taural cavity was filled with 15 grams of blood clots and 2 liters of blood. He has opined that the injuries found on the dead body of the deceased were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause the death of a person and the death was caused due to hemorrhagic shock due to stab injuries on chest. The evidence of PW 3 Dr. Patil corroborates the evidence of PW 1 Kanhaiyalal on the point of assault. Thus, we are of the view that the finding given by the learned Sessions Judge is legal and no

¶63

interference is required in holding the appellant guilty for

¶64

Pg 7 of 10

¶65

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶66

causing the death of the deceased.

¶67

On the point of quantum of sentence, Mrs. Upadhyay, the learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that the learned Sessions Judge ought to have considered the incident of quarrel between the appellant and the deceased. She submitted that PW

¶68

1 Kanhaiyalal has stated that there was an altercation between the appellant and his wife on one side and the deceased on the other. Due to the altercation, the appellant got enraged and he assaulted the deceased.

¶69

On considering the evidence of PW 1 Kanhaiyalal and the submissions of Mrs. Upadhyay, we are of the view that the case of the appellant can be brought under Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC. The evidence of PW 1 Kanhaiyalal discloses that the appellant and the deceased had abused each other in filthy language. The wife of the appellant also participated in the quarrel. Due to the quarrel, the appellant in a fit of anger brought

¶70

a knife from the kitchen of his flat and assaulted the deceased.

¶71

Pg 8 of 10

¶72

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶73

Thus, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we

¶74

reduce the gravity of the offence of murder to culpable homicide

¶75

not amounting to murder, hence, the following order:-

¶76

O R D E R

¶77

(a)The conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC is set aside, instead, the appellant is convicted for the offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC and sentenced to Eight years rigorous imprisonment. Fine and in default sentence is maintained.

¶78

(b)The appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent.

¶79

¶80

At this stage, we must record our appreciation for Advocate

¶81

Mrs. Sarojini Upadhyay, who is on the panel of Advocates of

¶82

High Court Legal Services Committee and who was appointed to

¶83

represent the appellant in this appeal. We found that she had meticulously prepared the matter and she has very ably argued

¶84

Pg 9 of 10

¶85

cri apeal 881-10.doc

¶86

the appeal. We quantify total legal fees to be paid to her in this

¶87

appeal by the High Court Legal Services Committee at ` 2500.

¶88

[MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J ]

¶89

jfoanz vkacsjdj

¶90

Pg 10 of 10

Pravinkumar Sartaj Bahadur Bhartiya v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravinkumar Sartaj Bahadur Bhartiya v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Rajaram Jadi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suresh Malhari Gaware Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shahajahan Aliakbar Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinayak Nivruti Dhumal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Krishna Malme Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinayak Nivruti Dhumal Vs the State of Maharashtra