Allowed

Justin John Lawrence v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC10 Jan 2020APL/523/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal application challenges the framing of a charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder against a pillion rider. The High Court relied on a lack of evidence showing common intention with the driver, resulting in the quashing of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Charge for the offence punishable under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code framed against the applicant is quashed and set aside.

Justin John Lawrence Vs the State of Maharashtra — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

(20)APLNo.5232019.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.523 OF 2019

¶5

Justin John Lawrence …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶6

Mr.Wesley Menezes, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶7

Mr.S.V.Gavand, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the
Respondent No.1/State.

¶8

CORAM : A.M.BADAR J.

¶9

DATED : 10th JANUARY 2020.

¶10

ORAL JUDGMENT:

¶11

1Leave to amend the prayer clause, as prayed by the
learned Counsel for the applicant is granted. He is permitted to
incorporate challenge to the charge for the offence punishable
under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
in the prayer clause of the application.

¶12

2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

¶13

3 Heard finally by consent of the parties.

¶14

4 The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the

¶15

1/3

¶16

Gaikwad RD

¶17

(20)APLNo.5232019.doc

¶18

applicant was pillion rider of the motorcycle which met with an
accident and as such, he cannot be charged for the offence
punishable under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code. My attention is drawn to the charge which is marked
as “Exhibit X” to demonstrate that the applicant/pillion rider of the
motorcylce is also charged for the offence punishable under
Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

5The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the
application by contending that the learned trial Court has rightly
framed charge for the offence punishable under Section 304 of the
Indian Penal Code.

¶20

6I have considered the submissions so advanced and
also perused the material placed on record.

¶21

7The First Information Report of the subject crime was
registered on the basis of report lodged by Assistant Police
Inspector Nana Patil on 15/07/2012. He reported that by rash
and negligent driving of his motorcycle by co-accused John
Alexander Fernandis while taking with him the present applicant
and other co-accused, fatal dash of the motorcycle was given to
deceased Tina Edward Misckita.

¶22

8I have perused the entire charge sheet. Statement of
witnesses does not show that the applicant/accused was sharing

¶23

2/3

¶24

Gaikwad RD

¶25

(20)APLNo.5232019.doc

¶26

any common intention with rider of motorcycle i.e. accused John
Alexander Fernandis for committing culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. Hence, for want of evidence incriminating
the applicant/accused No.2 for the offence punishable under
Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, the charge for the said
offence against him cannot be sustained. Therefore, the Order :

¶27

ORDER

¶28

(i) The application is allowed.

¶29

(ii)Charge for the offence punishable under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code framed against applicant/accused No.2 Justin John Lawrence is quashed and set aside.

¶30

(iii)The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

(A.M.BADAR, J.)

¶32

3/3

¶33

Gaikwad RD

Justin John Lawrence v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Justin John Lawrence 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

Oneza Intekhab Alam Munshi Vs Shirin Riaz Ahmed Munshi and Ors.

Laxman Shankar Sanap Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nupesh Rohidas Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ganesh Ankush Masurkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Subodh Vasudev Mulye Vs Deepak Gunpal Kunnure and Anr.

Subodh Vasudev Mulye Vs Deepak Gunpal Kunnure and Anr.