Case: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VIKRAM RANGNATH KESHBHAT

1. Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2. The State of Maharashtra is in appeal before this Court challenging an order of the High Court by which the conviction of the accused respondent has been altered from Section 302 IPC to one under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence is modified to the period undergone which is about five years. 3. We have considered the materials on record. The case of the prosecution is sought to be built on the basis of the dying declarations of the deceased and the testimony of PW-7-Rani, the minor daughter (three and half years old) in whose presence the incident is alleged to have taken place. The dying declarations clearly implicate the accused respondent and establish that it is the accused respondent who had poured kerosene on the deceased and burnt her to death. This is also the testimony of PW-7, who was also present at the place of occurrence (which fact was duly mentioned in the dying declaration of the deceased). 4. That apart, the High Court has held that the present is a case of grave and sudden provocation which the accused respondent was faced with on coming to know of the extra-marital affairs of the deceased. Accordingly, the High Court thought it proper to alter the conviction and sentence as aforesaid. 5. Having regard to the dying declarations and the fact that the materials on record indicate that the accused respondent had purchased one litre of kerosene earlier and had kept the same in the motorcycle which he used later to commit the crime, we are of the view that the above facts sufficiently indicate the fact that the crime committed was premeditated and was not in the heat of the moment.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]5. Having regard to the dying declarations and the fact that the materials on record indicate that the accused respondent had purchased one litre of kerosene earlier and had kept the same in the motorcycle which he used later to commit the crime, we are of the view that the above facts sufficiently indicate the fact that the crime committed was premeditated and was not in the heat of the moment.