Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Baba Bapurao Mungale, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, in Sessions Case No. 30 of 2011 for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence before the Bombay High Court. The prosecution case was that on 12th November 2010, the appellant used abusive language against the father and brother of the first informant, Wasudeo Admane (PW1). Later, when the deceased Kisana Admane and others went to the appellant's house to confront him, the appellant hit Kisana on the head with a stick. Kisana died the next day in the hospital. The trial court relied on the oral dying declaration made by the deceased to his brother Maroti (PW4) and to the police, as well as medical evidence showing a fracture of the skull and internal injuries. The High Court held that the appellant had knowledge that hitting a person on the head with a stick was likely to cause death, but there was no intention to cause death, as the incident occurred during a sudden quarrel. The court found that the dying declaration was reliable and corroborated by medical evidence. The court also held that Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (sudden quarrel) did not apply because the appellant used a dangerous weapon on a vital part. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Knowledge of likelihood of causing death - Appellant hit deceased with a stick on the head during a sudden quarrel over land dispute - Medical evidence showed fracture of skull and internal injuries - Held that the act was done with knowledge that it was likely to cause death, but without intention to cause death, hence conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is proper (Paras 1-10). B) Evidence Law - Dying declaration - Reliability - Deceased made oral dying declaration to his brother and later to police - Medical evidence confirmed that deceased was conscious and in a fit state to make declaration - Held that dying declaration is reliable and can be sole basis of conviction (Paras 5-8). C) Criminal Law - Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - Sudden quarrel - Not applicable - The quarrel was not sudden but arose out of previous enmity and appellant used a dangerous weapon (stick) on a vital part (head) - Held that the case does not fall under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 304 Part II IPC is sustainable on the basis of the evidence on record, particularly the dying declaration and medical evidence.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, in Sessions Case No. 30 of 2011 are confirmed.
Law Points
- Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Knowledge of likelihood of causing death
- Sudden quarrel
- Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC
- Appreciation of evidence
- Dying declaration
- Medical evidence
