Bombay High Court
Subhash Gorakh Dalve vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 February, 2025
Author: R.G. Avachat
Bench: R.G. Avachat
2025:BHC-AUG:5206-DB
APEAL-264-21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 264 OF 2021
Subhash Gorakh Dalve
Age: 31 years, Occu.: Nil,
R/o Chaundhala, Tq. Paithan,
Dist. Aurangabad ..APPELLANT
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT
....
Mr. A.K. Bhosle, Advocate for appellant
Mrs. K.B. Patil Bharaswadkar, Addl.P.P. for respondent - State
....
CORAM : R.G. AVACHAT AND
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ
DATE : 11th FEBRUARY, 2025
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and
order of consequential sentence dated 25th March, 2021 passed by the Court
of Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad ('trial Court') in Sessions Case,
No. 118 of 2018. Vide the impugned judgment and order, the appellant has
been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian
Penal Code ('I.P.C.'), and therefore, sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life
and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- with default stipulation.
2. This appeal is heard only on the limited question as to quantum of
sentence. The appellant is the husband of Vidya (victim). Vidya had been to
her parental house. The appellant went there on 05th January, 2018 and
APEAL-264-21.odt
assaulted Vidya with an axe. It was a bid on her life. The appellant would
also ill-treat her. Section 498-A of the I.P.C. was, therefore, invoked against
him besides Section 307 of the I.P.C. He was, however acquitted of Section
498-A.
3. The question is whether sentence of imprisonment for life for the
offence punishable under Section 307 of the I.P.C. is proportionate to the
crime committed by the appellant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant
had been to the house of his in-laws to get his wife back to her matrimonial
home. However, she did not join him. He was enraged thereby and
consequently the incident occurred.
5. Learned Addl.P.P. would, on the other hand, submit that had
really the appellant been to the house of his in-laws with a view to get his
wife back to her matrimonial home, he would not have carried the axe with
him. The appellant assaulted Vidya on her head and other vital parts of the
body. The same indicates the appellant's intention was to do away with his
wife. She, therefore, submitted that the trial Court has rightly sentenced the
appellant for imprisonment for life.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions, submitted that
the appellant's wife (Vidya) has been fully recovered and she has contracted
APEAL-264-21.odt
second marriage. These facts are post passing of the impugned judgment
herein. There is no material in support of the contention of the appellant.
7. Vidya's injury certificate indicates her to have suffered deep
incised wound over scalp, CLW on back side of neck and CLW over left and
right forearms besides blunt trauma.
8. Vidya was examined as Witness No. 1 in the case. She had come
to the Court to give her evidence. Same indicates her to have been
recovered of the injuries she suffered at the hands of the appellant. The
appellant is behind the bars for little over seven years. Her evidence
indicates that the appellant had been to her to get her back to her
matrimonial home. She had been to the field to pluck cotton. She had
reason to refuse to join him. According to her, the appellant would suspect
her character, and therefore, used to beat her up. As she refused to join him
for cohabitation, the appellant assaulted on her head with an axe and gave
another blow on her ear.
9. Thus, the facts and circumstances of the case indicate that the
appellant had been to the village of his in-laws to get his wife back to his
home. His wife refused to accompany him. He, therefore, assaulted her with
an axe. It is not known whether he carried the axe from his home or took it in
the field where the incident took place. Be that as it may. In our considered
view, the sentence of imprisonment for life for the given offence is grossly
APEAL-264-21.odt
disproportionate. Vidya appeared in person to give evidence suggest her to
have been recovered. We are, therefore, inclined to partly allow the appeal
in terms of following order :-
ORDER
(I) Criminal appeal is partly allowed.
(II) Impugned judgment and order dated 25th March, 2021
passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Aurangabad in Sessions Case, No. 118 of 2018, is hereby
set aside only to the extent of quantum of sentence
imposed against the appellant.
(III) The sentence imposed against the appellant is reduced
from life imprisonment to rigorous imprisonment for seven
and half years (7 ½ ) years with fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees
One Thousand).
(IV) Fine amount, if already paid, be adjusted and excess
amount be refunded to the appellant.
( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. ) ( R.G. AVACHAT, J. )
SSD
