Disposed

Mahadeo Pralhad Murme v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC8 May 2024APPLN/1909/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant convicted of murder and concealment offences based on an extra judicial confession and seizure of a wooden stick and steel pot; court found intention to kill debatable and suspended his sentence pending appeal, releasing him on personal surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Substantive sentence suspended pending appeal; applicant released on PR bond Rs.15,000/- with one surety of like amount.

Mahadeo Pralhad Murme Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

907-APPLN-1909-24.odt

¶2

2024:BHC-AUG:10099-DB

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1909 OF 2024 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 188 OF 2020

¶6

Mahadeo Pralhad Murme ..APPLICANT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT

¶9

Mr. C.V. Dharurkar, Advocate for applicant Ms. S.N. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for respondent - State

¶10

CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ DATE : 08^th MAY, 2024

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

This is an application for suspension of substantive sentence imposed by Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga in Sessions Case No. 47 of 2014 vide judgment and order dated 07^th December, 2017 thereby convicting the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Issue notice to the respondent. Learned A.P.P. waives service of notice for the sole respondent – State.

¶14

In nutshell, the case of prosecution is that the applicant alongwith his father assaulted his wife (Thakubai) at his residential home on 17^th

¶15

1 / 3

¶16

907-APPLN-1909-24.odt

¶17

August, 2014 by using wooden stick and steel pot ( rkaC;k ). She fell unconscious and was taken to hospital by her relatives. The applicant gave extra judicial confession to one of the relatives of his deceased wife that he had assaulted her. The applicant and his father were charge-sheeted and tried. The applicant’s father died during trial.

¶18

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the case is based on extra judicial confession of the applicant. He submits that the articles viz. wooden stick and steel pot, used in commission assault, were seized. He submits that the applicant is behind the bars for more than eight years. It is submitted by him that if we consider the evidence on record, intention to kill is not seen. It is submitted that the application be allowed.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. opposed the application. She submits that the assault was on the head by using wooden stick and steel pot which shows intention to kill. She submits that the applicant himself made an extra judicial confession to one of his relatives and this material on record itself goes on to state that he committed the crime. She submits that the application be rejected.

¶20

If we go into the evidence on record, the only evidence which appears against the applicant is the extra judicial confession made by the

¶21

2 / 3

¶22

907-APPLN-1909-24.odt

¶23

applicant to one of the relatives of his deceased wife and seizure of one wooden stick and one steel pot from the spot of incident. The cause of death is injury to head. It is debatable whether these articles would fall under the category of deadly weapons and whether the appellant had intention to kill. The applicant is behind the bars for more than eight years. In these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we proceed to pass the following order :-

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(I) Criminal application is allowed.

¶26

(II) Pending the appeal, the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga vide judgment and order dated 07^th December, 2017 passed in Sessions Case No. 47 of 2014, stands suspended.

¶27

(III) The applicant be released on his executing P.R. bonds in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with one surety in the like amount.

¶28

( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. )

¶29

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. )

¶30

SSD

¶31

3 / 3

Mahadeo Pralhad Murme v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahadeo Pralhad Murme 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

Ghungrusingh Jagbirsingh Tak Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dnyaneshwar Dhanaji Ingle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sanjay Champalal Bora vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Devidas Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dada Daulat Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravi @ Ravindra @ Gotu Shriram Navpute and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra