# RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

- **Citation:** [2009] 3 S.C.R. 526
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2009-02-27
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 2002
- **Bench:** Dr. Arijit Pasayat, Asok Kumar ' Gangul Y
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/rangnath-shamao-dhas-ors-v-state-of-maharashtra-25641
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

. -
Penal Code, 1860 -
s.304 Part II r/w s.149 -Assault with
c swords and axes - Death due to cumulative effect of the
injuries caused - Held: Accused-appellants liable to be
convicted u/s.304 Part-II r/w s.149.
According to the prosecution, owing to a previous
D enmity, the accused-appellants assaulted PW4's father
with swords and axes which resulted in his death.
IPlacing reliance on the evidence of PW 4, 5 and 6, the
Courts below convicted the appellants in terms of s.304,
Part II r/w s.149 IPC. Hence the present appeal.
E
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The First Information Report was lodged
within a very short time. The alleged occurrence took
--
place around 2.45 p.m. and the FIR was lodged at 7.15
~
F p.m. at the Police Station which was situated at about 22
K.M. from the place of incident. The evidence of PWs 4,5
and 6 clearly established the complicity of the accused
persons. Added to that, as rightly noted by the High Court
the medical evidence is not at total variance with the
l
G ocular evidence. [Para 5] [530-D-F]
~
Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR
" '
fl.
1983 SC 484, referred to.
2. In the instant case the doctor has categorically
H
526
....
,
RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF
527
MAHARASHTRA
stated that the cumulative effe,ct of the injuries was the
A
cause of death. That being so, the judgment of the High
Court affirming that of the trial Court cannot be said to
be in any way unsustainable. [Para 6] (531-8-C]
Case Law Reference:
AIR 1983 SC 484
referred to
Para 5
CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 194 of 2002.
B
From the Judgment/Order dated 16.8.2001 passed by
C
the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal
No. 441 of 1985.
Shivaji M. Jadhav for the Appellant.
Ravindra Keshavrao for the Respondent.

## Text

[2009] 3 S.C.R. 526
.
'
A
RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS.
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
(Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 2002)
B
FEBRUARY 27, 2009
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR
'
GANGUL Y, JJ.]
. -
Penal Code, 1860 -
s.304 Part II r/w s.149 -Assault with
c swords and axes - Death due to cumulative effect of the
injuries caused - Held: Accused-appellants liable to be
convicted u/s.304 Part-II r/w s.149.
According to the prosecution, owing to a previous
D enmity, the accused-appellants assaulted PW4's father
with swords and axes which resulted in his death.
IPlacing reliance on the evidence of PW 4, 5 and 6, the
Courts below convicted the appellants in terms of s.304,
Part II r/w s.149 IPC. Hence the present appeal.
E
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The First Information Report was lodged
within a very short time. The alleged occurrence took
--
place around 2.45 p.m. and the FIR was lodged at 7.15
~
F p.m. at the Police Station which was situated at about 22
K.M. from the place of incident. The evidence of PWs 4,5
and 6 clearly established the complicity of the accused
persons. Added to that, as rightly noted by the High Court
the medical evidence is not at total variance with the
l
G ocular evidence. [Para 5] [530-D-F]
~
Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR
" '
fl.
1983 SC 484, referred to.
2. In the instant case the doctor has categorically
H
526
....
,
RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF
527
MAHARASHTRA
stated that the cumulative effe,ct of the injuries was the
A
cause of death. That being so, the judgment of the High
Court affirming that of the trial Court cannot be said to
be in any way unsustainable. [Para 6] (531-8-C]
Case Law Reference:
AIR 1983 SC 484
referred to
Para 5
CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 194 of 2002.
B
From the Judgment/Order dated 16.8.2001 passed by
C
the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal
No. 441 of 1985.
Shivaji M. Jadhav for the Appellant.
Ravindra Keshavrao for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is
D
to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court
E
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
F
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:
The informant Murlidhar Krishna Ronge (PW-4) is the son
G
of Krishna (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). At the
time of the incident, the informant, Manik Suryabhan Dhas
(PW-5), Vasant Bhagwan Dhas (PW-6) and the appellants
H
528
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2009) 3 S.C.R.
A were living in Village Dhas Pimpalgaon within the limits of
Taluka Barshi, District Solapur. The appellants are closely
interconnected. Appellants Rangnath and Ganpati are brothers
and appellant Govardhan is their relation. Appellants Narsing
and Dattu are also brothers.
B
There was enmity between the deceased, the informant
on one hand and the appellants on the other. There were two
pieces of land known by the name of Vanjechi Patti and
Chinchechi Patti. The former was admeasuring two acres and
the latter one- and-half acres. The land known as Chinchechi
C Patti originally belonged to one Atmaram Ronge and was
purchased in auction by the deceased Krishna. After
purchasing it, the deceased started cultivating it. One
Dnyandeo Ronge, who was a tenant of the said land, had
given up his rights. Appellant Govardhan's niece was married
D to the son of the said Dnyandeo Govardhan and Dnyandeo
wanted that the land known as Chinchechi Patti should be
sold without consideration. The deceased, on account of
threats of Govardhan, executed sale deed of that land in favour
of Dnyandeo. About one-and-half years prior to the incident,
E the marriage of the informant Murlidhar was settled with the
daughter of one Vithal, resident of village Dhas Pimpalgaon.
The appellants were irked by this because they did not want
the deceased to settle the marriage of informant with Vithal's
daughter. The appellants used to also threaten the informant
F and the deceased, saying that they should give up the land
Vanjechi Patti.
On 22nd November, 1984 at about 7.30 a.m., the
informant Murlidhar, his father Krishna (deceased), his
G labourers Manik Dhas and Vasant Dhas came to land gat
No.98, where crops of sugarcane, jowar and gram were
standing. They started cutting the sugarcane crop. At about
2.00 p.m. all of them had lunch, which was brought by the
informant's mother. Thereafter, the informant went to take a
round and the deceased Krishna directed Manik and Vasant
H
.
...
. .,
..
RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF
529
MAHARASHTRA [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
,,. "'
to get to the northern side of the field for work. At about 2.45
A
p.m., the informant. Manik and Vasant heard the shouts of
Krishna "Melo Melo" (I am dying, I am dying). Consequently,
they rushed towards the place from where the cries were
coming. They saw appellants Rangnath and Govardhan armed
with swords, appellants Ganpat, Narsing and Dattu armed with
B
axes, chasing K~ishna. They also saw that they overtook
~ . Krishna in the jowar crop, and thereafter, started assaulting
him with weapons in their hands resulting in his falling down.
The informant asked them not to assault Krishna and to save
him from being assaulted fell on his body. Thereupon, the c
appellants stopped assaulting Krishna. When Manik and Vasant
tried to intervene, appellants Rangnath and Govardhan
threatened them with dire consequences. Thereafter, the
appellants ran away.
As a consequence of the assault, and the informant falling
0
down on Krishna's person to save him from being assaulted
by the appellants, the clothes of Krishna were stained with
blood.
After the appellants had run away, the informant Murlidhar
E
brought a bullock cart, put his father Krishna in the said bullock
cart, and proceeded with him to village Khadkalgaon. At the
~
outskirts of the said Village, Krishna breathed his last.
J.
Thereafter, the informant carried the corpse of his father to his
house and proceeded to Pangari Police Station to lodge the
F
F.l.R.
On completion of investigation charge sheet was filed.
Charges were framed and as the accused persons pleaded
innocence, trial was held. PWs 4, 5 and 6 were stated to be
G
eye witnesses and placing reliance on their evidence the trial
. "'
Court recorded the conviction in terms of Section 304 Part II
IPC and imposed 7 years of rigorous imprisonment.
3. In appeal before the High Court the primary stand wast
that the offence under Section 304 Part II IPC is not made out
H
530
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2009] 3 S.C.R.
" ....
A 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
B that the injuries could not have caused death cumulatively in
some cases. That being so, the conviction under Section 304
Part 11 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
c 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
D the trial Court under Section 304 Part II IPC is in order.
4. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the parties
re-iterated the respective submissions before the High Court.
5. It is to be noted that the First Information Report was
E lodged within a very short time. The alleged occurrence took
place around 2.45 p.m. and the FIR was lodged at 7.15 p.m.
at the Police Station which was situated at about 22 K.M. from
the place of incidence. The evidence of PWs 4, 5 and 6 clearly
..
established the complicity of the accused persons. ·Added to
•
F that, as rightly noted by the High Court the medical evidence
is not at total variance with the ocular evidence. It was observed
in Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat (AIR 1983
SC 484 at para 12) as follows:
G
"12. Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only
corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been
>
~
caused in the manner alleged and nothing more. The use
which the defence can make of the medical evidence is
to prove that the injuries could not possibly have been
caused in the manner alleged and thereby discredit the
H
eye-witnesses. Unless, however the medical evidence in
RANGNATH SHAMAO DHAS & ORS. v. STATE OF
531
MAHARASHTRA [DR ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.]
its turn goes so far that it completely rules out all
A
possibilities whatsoever of injuries taking place in the
manner alleged by eyewitnesses, the testimony of the eyewitnesses cannot be thrown out on the ground of alleged
inconsistency between it and the medical evidence."
6. In the instant case as noted above the doctor has
categorically stated that the cumulative effect of the injuries
was the cause of death. That being so, the judgment of the
High Court affirming that of the trial Court cannot be said to be
B
in any way unsustainable. The appeal is without merit, deserves
C
dismissal which we direct. The appellants who were released
on bail in terms of the order dated 3.12.2001 shall surrender
to custody forthwith to serve the remainder of sentence.
B.B.B.
Appeal dismissed.