Gunwant Bapurao Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra
Case Details
2025:BHC-AUG:3932-DB 1 6APPLN4316.2024.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 6 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4316 OF 2024 IN APEAL/938/2024 Gunil @ Gunwant Bapurao Gaikwad VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ... Mr. Satej S. Jadhav - Advocate for Applicant Mr. S. D. Ghayal – Addl.P.P. for Respondent/State ... CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ. DATED : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2025 PER COURT : - 1. This is an Application for suspension of substantive sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latur, District Latur, in Sessions Case No. 86 of 2021, by the Judgment and Order dated 01.10.2024, convicting the Applicant/Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment of one month. 2. The case of the Prosecution in brief is that, the Applicant was working as a Meson and was residing with his deceased wife at Ghodke Complex, Latur. On 16.01.2021, around 23:16 hours, the Applicant went to Gandhi Chowk Police Station and reported as under:- 2 6APPLN4316.2024.odt ;kosGh ble ukes xq.koar ckiwjko xk;dokM gk nk# fimu xka/kh pkSd iksfyl LVs”ku gtj ;smu eh ek>~;k iRuhpk xGk nkcwu eMZj dsyks vkgs vls lkafxrY;koj vkEgh R;kl fo”oklkr ?ksmu fopkjiwl dsyh vlrk rks jk- Mksaxzt] rk- pkdwj] ft- ykrwj ;sFkhy jfgoklh vlwu ykrwj ;sFks LVkbZy Qj”khps dke djrks o olokMh ;sFks fdj;kps #ee/;s iRuhlg jkg.;kl vlwu ek>h iRuh Bsdsnkj dsnkj lkscr laca/k vlY;kus o rs laca/k eh ek>s MksG~;kus ikghY;keqGs eyk jkx lgu u >kY;keqGs eh ek>~;k fdjk;kps jkgrs ?kjh iRuhpk xGk nkcwu eMZj dsyks vkgs- vls lkafxrysus lnjps ?kVukLFkG gs ,e-vk;-Mh-lh- ;sFks vlY;kus vkEgh ih-,l-vks- ;kauk ekfgrh nsmu lsdaM eksckbZy ikBo.;kl lkafxrys- ih-,l-vks- ;kauh iks-LVs- ,e-vk;-Mh-lh- ph lsdaM eksckbZy iks-uk-@1224 fxjhlg iks-LVs- xka/kh pkSd ;sFks ikBowu fnY;kus lnj ?kVusph [kk=h dj.;klkBh oj uewn blekl iq<hy dk;Zokgh dj.ks dkeh R;kaps rkC;kr fnys Eg.kwu uksan- 3. On completion of investigation, the Applicant/Appellant came to be Charge-Sheeted. After the evidence was led, the Applicant/Appellant came to be convicted as referred above. 4. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant that though the defence of alibi was taken before
Facts
the learned Trial Court, the Applicant/Appellant is raising the defence now on the basis of the case of the Prosecution that the said Crime was committed while lost his control due to grave and sudden provocation. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant that, even if the case of the Prosecution is taken as it is, it would fall within Exception-1 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that, the Applicant was a Meson and is behind the bars for last little over four (4) years. He submits that the Application be allowed. 3 6APPLN4316.2024.odt 5. The Application is opposed by the learned APP. He submits that the Applicant/Appellant himself reported the Crime to the Police Station and the Station Diary Entry was made. He submits that he has been properly convicted and sentenced. 6. From the papers, it is clear that the Applicant/Appellant was working as a Meson. From the aforesaid case of Prosecution, it is clear that, the Applicant/Appellant witnessed the illicit relations between his wife and the other person and the offence is committed. Useful reference can be made to the observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in K.M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605, wherein the point of grave and sudden provocation was considered. The relevant paragraph nos.84 and 85 from the said Judgment reads as under :- “84.Is there any standard of a reasonable man for the application of the doctrine of “grave and sudden” provocation? No abstract standard of reasonableness can be laid down. What a reasonable man will do in certain circumstances depends upon the customs, manners, way of life, traditional values etc.; in short, the cultural, social and emotional background of the society to which an accused belongs. In our vast country there are social groups ranging from the lowest to the highest state of civilization. It is neither possible nor desirable to lay down any standard with precision : it is for the court to decide in each case, having regard to the relevant circumstances. It is not necessary in this case to ascertain whether a reasonable man placed in the position of the accused 4 6APPLN4316.2024.odt
Legal Reasoning
would have lost his self-control momentarily or even temporarily when his Wife confessed to him of her illicit intimacy with another, for we are satisfied on the evidence that the accused regained his self-control and killed Ahuja deliberately. 85. The Indian law, relevant to the present inquiry, may be stated thus : (1) The test of “grave and sudden” provocation is whether a reasonable man, belonging to the same class of society as the accused, placed in the situation in which the accused was placed would be so provoked as to lose his self- control. (2) In India, words and gestures may also, under certain circumstances, cause grave and sudden provocation to an accused so as to bring his act within the first Exception to s. 300 of the Indian Penal Code. (3) The mental background created by the previous act of the victim may be taken into consideration in ascertaining whether the subsequent act caused grave and sudden provocation for committing the offence. (4) The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the influence of passing arising from that provocation and not after the passion had cooled down by lapse of time, or otherwise giving room and scope for premeditation and calculation.” 7. Prima-facie, from the very origin of Prosecution’s case it appears that, the case would fall within Exception-1 to Section 300 of Indian Penal Code. The Appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future. The Applicant/Appellant is behind the bars for little over four (4) years and hence, we proceed to pass the following order : -
Decision
ORDER [i] The Application is allowed. 5 6APPLN4316.2024.odt [ii] The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant/ Appellant, Gunil @ Gunwant Bapurao Gaikwad, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Latur, District Latur, in Sessions Case No. 86 of 2021, by the Judgment and Order dated 01.10.2024, convicting the Applicant/Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment of one month, is suspended during the pendency of the present Appeal. [iii] The Applicant/Appellant be released on bail on his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount. [iv] Bail before the Trial Court. 8. Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly. [NEERAJ P. DHOTE] JUDGE JUDGE [R. G. AVACHAT] SG Punde Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 12/02/2025 14:54:09