RANGNATH SHAMRAO DHAS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court upholding the conviction of the appellants for offence punishable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). Two appeals were disposed of by a common order. Criminal Appeal No. 441 of 1985 was filed by the present appellants questioning their conviction while Criminal Appeal No. 608 of 1985 was filed by the State of Maharashtra contending that the appropriate conviction should have been under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC.

(2.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

(3.) In appeal before the High Court the primary stand was that the offence under Section 304 Part II IPC is not made out and the evidence of so called eye witnesses is unworthy of credence. It was submitted that the time as indicated by the eye witnesses is unacceptable because the medical evidence shows that there was no undigested or semi-digested food. It was also submitted that the doctor's evidence clearly showed that the injuries could not have caused death cumulatively in some cases. That being so, the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is not proper. The High Court held that the medical evidence did not wholly belie the prosecution version and did not render the eye witnesses' version suspect. The High Court did not accept appellants' stand and observed that the doctor has given a hypothetical answer that in some cases it might cause death and in some cases it might not cause death, but stated in clear terms that in the instant case it has caused death. The High Court held that the conviction as recorded by the trial Court under Section 304 Part II IPC is in order.