NDLI: Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1860: s.302 Penal Code
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860: s.302 – Conviction based on circumstantial evidence – Prosecution case was that the appellant was addicted to liquor and used to abuse and beat his wife forcing her to get money from her mother – On the fateful night, the appellant and his wife went to sleep in their house – Next day morning, when the brother of the appellant went to call the appellant for going to field for harvesting crop, appellant informed him that his wife committed suicide by hanging – Trial court convicted appellant under s.302 and sentenced him to imprisonment for life – High Court upheld the said order – On appeal, held: The medical expert who conducted the autopsy admitted that the rope, which was found on the spot, could have been used for suicidal hanging of the deceased – He further stated that in case of homicidal strangulation, the bodily resistance would be reflected – Admittedly, there were no marks on the body to suggest violence or struggle – In any case, the medical expert himself did not rule out the possibility of suicidal death – In the light of this evidence, trial court as well as High Court erred in holding that the prosecution proved that the death of the deceased was homicidal – The motive relied on by prosecution was ill-treatment by the appellant meted out to the deceased for not arranging money from her mother – PW-3, mother of the deceased stated that appellant and deceased had been to her house and stayed for four days few days prior to the incident – This showed that the relations between the deceased and appellant were cordial – Thus, it was not safe to rely on the uncorroborated evidence of such a witness – Also, prosecution sought to rely on the evidence of PW-1 – However, his evidence was full of improvements and omissions – Even trial court and High Court disbelieved his evidence – Thus, prosecution utterly failed to prove motive beyond doubt – As such, an important link to complete the chain of circumstances was totally absent – Prosecution failed to prove a single incriminating circumstance beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction and sentence passed by trial court as affirmed by High Court is set aside and appellant is acquitted of all the charges. Evidence Act, 1872: s.106 – Burden to prove – s.106 does not directly operate against either a husband or wife staying under the same roof and being the last person seen with the deceased – s.106 does not absolve the prosecution of discharging its primary burden of proving the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt – It is only when the prosecution has led evidence which, if believed, will sustain a conviction, or which makes out a prima facie case, that the question arises of considering facts of which the burden of proof would lie upon the accused – In the instant case, the prosecution has even failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the death was homicidal. Criminal law: Motive – Though in a case of direct evidence, motive would not be relevant, in a case of circumstantial evidence, motive plays an important link to complete the chain of circumstances. Criminal law: False explanation or non-explanation can only be used as an additional circumstance, when the prosecution has proved the chain of circumstances leading to no other conclusion than the guilt of the accused – However, it cannot be used as a link to complete the chain. Criminal law: Two views – If two views are possible, the benefit shall always go to the accused.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 136
Petitioner	Shivaji Chintappa Patil
Respondent	State Of Maharashtra
SCR	[2021] 2 S.C.R. 617
Judgement Date	2021-03-02
Case Number	1348

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

Shivaji Dayanu Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Babasaheb Apparao Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Gokul Parashram Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Netaji Achyut Shinde (patil) & Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Bonky @ Bharat Shivaji Mane and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Sunil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Vilas Pandurang Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Krishna Govind Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Lahu Kamlakar Patil and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Shivaji Dayanu Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Babasaheb Apparao Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Gokul Parashram Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Netaji Achyut Shinde (patil) & Anr. Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Bonky @ Bharat Shivaji Mane and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Sunil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Vilas Pandurang Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Krishna Govind Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Lahu Kamlakar Patil and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra