SURYAKANT BABURAO @ RAMRAO PHAD versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

SURYAKANT BABURAO @ RAMRAO PHAD versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Considering the nature of injuries caused to PW-6 (gunshot wounds capable of causing death) and facts and circumstances, the High Court erred in reducing the sentence for accused No.1. Sentence for accused No.1 enhanced to six years and six months rigorous imprisonment; acquittal and sentences for accused Nos.2 and 3 affirmed.

Parties
Appellant: Suryakant Baburao @ Ramrao Phad; Respondents: State of Maharashtra and Others; Respondent: Devraj (Accused No.1); Respondent: Ashish (Accused No.2); Respondent: Balaji (Accused No.3)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Attempt to Murder, Sentencing, Quantum of Sentence, Compensation to Victims
Criminal Law Attempt to Murder Sentencing Quantum of Sentence Compensation to Victims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suryakant Baburao @ Ramrao Phad

Appellant

State of Maharashtra and Others

Respondents

Devraj (Accused No.1)

Respondent

Ashish (Accused No.2)

Respondent

Balaji (Accused No.3)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was justified in reducing the sentence of imprisonment imposed on accused No.1 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC
  2. 2 Whether the acquittal of accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 307 r/w Section 34 IPC and reduction of sentence under Section 326 r/w Section 34 IPC is proper

Ratio Decidendi

Considering the nature of injuries caused to PW-6 (gunshot wounds capable of causing death) and facts and circumstances, the High Court erred in reducing the sentence for accused No.1. Sentence for accused No.1 enhanced to six years and six months rigorous imprisonment; acquittal and sentences for accused Nos.2 and 3 affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of High Court dated 12.07.2018 set aside as regards accused No.1; sentence enhanced to six years and six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC.
  • Acquittal of accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC affirmed; conviction under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC and sentence reducing imprisonment to period already undergone affirmed.