In this criminal appeal, the High Court of Bombay reviewed the conviction of the appellant for murder and grievous hurt after he assaulted his wife and son with a sickle, leading to the wife's death. The court upheld the lower court's judgment dismissing the appeal.
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 97 OF 2010
Daji Raja Pawar ] Age : 43 Years, Occ. : Service, ] Residing at Saphale, Rambaugh Pada, ] Dist. Thane. ] At present lodged at Nashik Road Central ] Prison as Convict No. C/7868, Nashik. ] Appellant (Org. Accused)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ] At the instance of Saphale Police Station in ] C.R. No. 53 of 2008 ] Respondent
Ms. Rohini M. Dandekar, Advocate appointed for the Appellant
Mrs. V.R. Bhonsale, APP for the State
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ
DATE : AUGUST 6, 2013.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :-
Additional Sessions Judge, Palghar in Sessions Case No. 11 of
Pg 1 of 10
son PW 1 Shridhar. The appellant, his wife Anandi and their son PW 1 Shridhar used to reside together at Palghar, Dist. Thane.
The appellant was addicted to liquor and he used to assault his wife Anandi after consuming liquor.
Pg 2 of 10
the appellant, his wife Anandi and their son Shridhar had dinner
and were preparing to go to bed. At that time, the appellant gave blow with sickle on the right ear of his wife Anandi. When Shridhar went to intervene to separate them, the appellant also assaulted him by sickle on his right ear. Shridhar shouted. Neighbours came to the spot. The appellant then ran away from the spot with the sickle.
hospital. PW 8 Dr. Randive examined PW 1 Shridhar as well as Anandi. On the body of Shridhar, PW 8 Dr. Randive found CLW on his right tempro parietal region of size 3 x 1/2 cm muscle deep. On the body of Anandi, PW 1 Dr. Randive found CLW on right side of her face near right ear of size 5 x 2 cm muscle deep. According to Dr. Randive, the injury sustained by Anandi was grievous in nature. PW 1 Shridhar was directed to take his mother to KEM Hospital. However, after Anandi was taken to KEM hospital, she died the next day i.e. on 18.11.2008. PW 1 Shridhar lodged the
FIR (Exh. 12). Thereafter, investigation commenced.
Pg 3 of 10
PW 6 Dr. Balsara performed the postmortem on the dead body of
Anandi. He found following injuries on the dead body of Anandi:-
iii. Sutured venus cut wound on both arms.
According to PW 6 Dr. Balsara, the cause of death was traumatic chorium cerebral injuries allegedly sustained due to assault (unnatural). PW 6 Dr. Balsara opined that the injuries were possible by muddemal weapon Koyta (sickle). After completion of investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed.
Sections 302 and 324 of IPC. The appellant pleaded not guilty to
Pg 4 of 10
the said charge and claimed to be tried. His defence is that of
total denial and false implication. After going through the evidence adduced in this case, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated in paragraph 1 above. Hence, this appeal.
the learned APP for the State. After giving our anxious consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties, the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge and the evidence on record, for the reasons stated below, we are of the opinion that appellant assaulted his wife Anandi which led to her death. The appellant also assaulted his son Shridhar with a sickle.
Anandi and the appellant at Palghar. Shridhar has stated that his
Pg 5 of 10
father used to assault his mother after consuming liquor. On 17.11.2008 at about 08.30 p.m., they had dinner and were preparing for bed. That time, his father i.e the appellant had given blow with sickle on the right ear of his mother. When Shridhar went to intervene to separate them, his father also assaulted him by sickle on his right ear. Shridhar shouted. Neighbours came to the spot. The appellant then ran away from the spot with the sickle. PW 1 Shridhar took his mother to the Government hospital. PW 8 Dr. Randive examined PW 1 Shridhar as well as Anandi. According to Dr. Randive, the injuries sustained by Anandi were grievous in nature, hence, PW 1 Shridhar was directed to take his mother to KEM Hospital. However, after taking Anandi to KEM hospital, she died the next day i.e. on 18.11.2008. PW 1 Shridhar lodged the FIR (Exh. 12). There is nothing in the cross-examination of witness Shridhar so as to disbelieve his testimony that the appellant assaulted his wife Anandi and his son Shridhar with a sickle. Thus, the evidence of PW 1 Shridhar shows that the appellant caused injuries to his wife
Anandi and Shridhar with a sickle.
Pg 6 of 10
on the dead body of Anandi also shows that the cause of death
was traumatic chorium cerebral injuries allegedly sustained due to assault (unnatural).
The sickle was blood stained. The sickle was sealed on the spot
and panchnama was prepared (Exh. 18B). The sickle was sent to
Pg 7 of 10
C.A. As per C.A. report (Exh 27), the sickle was stained with
human blood. The appellant has not furnished any explanation for
the same. In this connection, we may usefully refer to the decision of
the Supreme Court in the case Gura Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan1 ,
wherein it has been observed as under :
" In view of the authoritative pronouncement of this Court in Teja Ram Case (1999) 3 SCC 507) we do not find any substance in the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant that in the absence of the report regarding the 'origin of the blood, the trial Court could not have convicted the accused. The Serologist & Chemical Examiner has found that the chadar seized in consequence of the disclosure statement made by the appellant was stained with human blood. As with lapse of time the classification of the blood could not be determined, no bonus is conferred upon the accused to claim any benefit on the strength of such a belated and stale argument. The trial Court as well as the High Court were, therefore, justified in holding the circumstance as proved beyond doubt against the appellant.”
shows that when the appellant was arrested, the clothes on his person were seized by the police under panchnama (Exh. 19).
The clothes of the appellant were found blood stained. As per C.A.
1 (2001) 2 SCC 205
Pg 8 of 10
report (Exh 27), the pant of the appellant was stained with blood
of 'A' group and his shirt was stained with human blood. The clothes of the deceased i.e her saree and petticoat were also found stained with blood of 'A' group. This shows that the blood of
the group of the deceased was found on the pant of the appellant.
This is a strong incriminating circumstance against the appellant.
The appellant has not furnished any explanation for the finding of
blood stains of the blood group of Anandi on his pant.
is sufficient evidence to connect the appellant with the crime.
Thus, we find no merit in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed.
Authorities and to the appellant who is in jail.
Ms. Rohini M. Dandekar who is on the panel of Advocates of
High Court Legal Services Committee and who was appointed to
Pg 9 of 10
represent the appellant in this appeal. We found that she had meticulously prepared the matter and she has very ably argued the appeal. We quantify total legal fees to be paid to her in this
appeal by the High Court Legal Services Committee at ` 2500.
[MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI,J ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj
Pg 10 of 10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction and sentence of the appellant for murder and grievous hurt under the IPC should be upheld on appeal.
Whether the appellant's defence of robbery by unknown persons is tenable given the evidence of assault by him with a sickle.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gura Singh Vs. State of RajasthanExplained¶70
Gura Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (2001) 2 SCC 205 · Who else cites this
Teja Ram CaseExplained¶69
Teja Ram Case (1999) 3 SCC 507 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Daji Raja Pawar
State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
Mridula Bhatkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
