Kailas Suresh Waghmare v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
The Bombay High Court rejected a criminal application against a death sentence. The court found discrepancies in eye-witness statements regarding weapons and positions but held that an eye-witness confirmed the accused struck the deceased. Consequently, the court found no case for suspending the death penalty.
What did the court decide?
The criminal application seeking suspension of death penalty was rejected.
What the court decided
1 appa-391.19.docx
pmw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.391 OF 2019 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.387 OF 2019
Kailas Suresh Waghmare … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondents
Mr. Y.P. Deshmukh for the Applicant. Ms. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 7th JUNE, 2019.
P.C. :
1 Heard the learned counsel appearing (appointed) and the learned APP. The submission is presence of so called eye-witness Sonam on spot is not established since informant Chitrang does not mention her. Similarly she does not mention Chitrang. It is further submitted that the deceased was the last person and Sonam was walking in his front and other eye-witness Prashant Pawar was in her front. So Prashant Pawar could not have normally seen the incident. His first statement recorded on 15th November 2016 under section 161 is relied upon to show that he does not state that deceased Sandeep gave a call to wife of accused or had conversation with her or that accused who got angered thereby went inside and returned with dagger. He, therefore, submits that even presence of Prashant on spot is doubtful.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the presence of eye-witnesses on the spot is satisfactorily established given discrepancies in their police statements.
Whether the alleged single blow and heat of passion reduce the offence under Section 302 IPC to a lesser offence.
Whether the evidence of eye-witnesses and facts of the case warrant suspension of punishment.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Kailas Suresh Waghmare
- respondent
State of Maharashtra
Coram
B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court