Deadly Assault On Sleeping Man After A Fight Not Culpable Homicide But Murder: Bombay High Court

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Sharmila Deshmukh upheld the life sentence awarded to Mittu Pareda by a Sessions court in 2013. Pareda killed his acquaintance with a log of wood in his sleep, hours after the deceased fought with him and accused him of stealing his phone.

"Evidence of PW-2 and PW-5 reveals that after the quarrel about the mobile phone, the Appellant had gone to fetch the keys of the truck and Utpal had gone to sleep in the truck. Considering the fact that Appellant had assaulted Utpal while he was asleep, it is not a case of grave and sudden provocation so as to fall within the exception I to Section 300 of IPC."

Advocate for the accused submitted that there is no direct evidence to connect the accused with the offence; the entire case rests on the concept of last seen without corroboration. There was no motive to kill, the appellant's counsel argued. He pointed out that the he was friends with the victim and no evidence of prior enmity has come forth. He further claimed that they were both intoxicated and it was not a premeditated assault.

The prosecutor submitted that the motive had clearly been established. The mobile phone was the cause of dispute and the case was proved beyond reasonable doubt.

One the of the witnesses said he saw the accused getting out of the truck, he also saw the log of wood and the deceased covered in blood.

Regarding the discrepancies, the court said, "In our opinion, the said discrepancies are minor discrepancies, which do not create a doubt about the credibility of the evidence to connect the Appellant with the offence. The eye witnesses cannot be expected to give a picture-perfect report of the incident and there are bound to be some minor discrepancies."

The court further rejected the argument that the accused deserved to have his sentence reduced as the assault did not take place in the heat of passion.

"the assault took place much after the quarrel between the Appellant and Utpal; that the Appellant assaulted Utpal when he was asleep; that there was an assault with force on the head, chest and neck of Utpal, which was sufficient to cause death; and, that there was no grave and sudden provocation to justify the reduction of the offence. In our opinion, the facts of the case do not warrant reduction of the offence from Section 302 to 304 Part-II," the court said.

It accordingly dismissed the appeal.

Case Title: Mittu @ Mithu Bholi Pareda Versus State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 411 

Click Here To Read/Download Order