Law of Crime ASSIGNMENT

SUBMITTED BY:
PRAYAG SONI
4th SEMESTER
BBA.LLB. (HONS.)
ROLL NO. – 1120181901

SUBMITTED TO:
DR. AMBIKA HARISH
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
FACULTY OF Law
NLU SHIMLA
 Proforma for Reporting the First Information (FIR) of
a Cognizable Offence
(Under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code)

Police Station: Rabodi District: Thane

1. Personal details of the Complainant / Informant:

(a) Name: Prayag Soni

(b) Father's / Husband's Name: Gajendra Soni

(c) Address: 9, Ashok Nagar, Near Godavari Complex, Thane District, Mumbai
(Maharashtra)

(d) Phone number & Fax: 9414696024

(e) Email: prayag.maheshwari123@gmail.com

2. Place of Occurrence:

a) Distance from the police station: 5km

b) Direction from the police station: South-West

3. Date and Hour of Occurrence: 05.04.2014

4. Offence:

a) Nature of the offence (e.g. murder, theft, rape, etc.): Murder

b) Section (To be decided/written by Office only): 300-304

c) Particulars of the property (in case one has got stolen): N/A

5. Description of the accused: A middle aged man with a scar on his right cheek and partly bald.

6. Details of witnesses (if any): Myself

7. Complaint: the accused had knocked her wife down, put one knee on her chest, and struck her
two or three violent blows on the face with the closed fist, producing extraversion of blood on the
brain and she died in consequence, either on the spot, or very shortly afterwards and the accused
ran away from the crime place.

Signature:

TRUTH PREVAILS
 FORM FOR RECORDING STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
(SECTION 164 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE)

Before the honorable Judicial Magistrate…… Maville J……. at the Bombay

court Sub-Division…. bench…. of District...........Thane...............

(1) The accused.........Shiva............is brought by……...Ram Kumar.........

Police (Sub) Inspector/(Head) Constable before me at my…. courtroom no.

13……. on the 20/09/14 at (c)...................4:00...................P.M. to have his
statement recorded. The letter given to me, dated.........25/10/14..................
from the Court is attached to the record.
I have ascertained that the offence was committed near (a).........Godavari
Complex............ on the (b)....05.04.2014............at (c)….9:00…. P.M.

(2) The accused is placed in charge of Ram Kumar I have satisfied

myself that there is no police officer in the Court or in any place when the
proceedings can be seen or heard except the above named Ram Kumar who
have/has not been concerned in the investigation of the crime or in the
arrest or production of the accused.

(3) The accused is questioned regarding the time during which and the
places where he has been under the control of the police.

First placed under observation I was detained/arrested at (e).... Godavari

Complex………at…….10:00......P.M...........on ........05.04.2014................in
Village...........Rabodi.................. of district......Thane............... I was taken
to (f) .Police Station.......... at ......Rabodi............

on ......24.09.14........ I was sent to you from (e).........Rabodi...... at....

Court.......... on ......04:00...............P.M.

(4) The accused is then cautioned as follows: -

“You should remember that I am a Magistrate, that you are not bound to
make a confession and that such a confession may be used in evidence
against you.
 Further cautions, if any.
The accused is then questioned to ascertain whether he has understood
the warning and whether the confession is voluntary or is caused by any
inducement, threat or promise referred to in Section 24, Indian Evidence Act.

(5) Record of statement made: -

The statement of ....Shiva................ aged about ....52......... years, made in
the language......Marathi..............
My n a m e i s . . . . . . . S h i v a . . . . . . . My f a t h e r ’ s n a m e i s
................Ranveer..................................... and my
occupation.............Driver......................
My home is at.......Godavari Complex......................
Police Station.................Rabodi................
District..........Thane..................... I reside at............Godavari
Complex...............................
The accused has confessed all the allegations on him.

Signature or mark of accused.

Signature of Magistrate.
(6) Prescribed Memorandum: -

I have explained to (h) .......Shiva.............. that he is not bound to make

a confession and that, if he does so any confession, he may make be used as
evidence against him and I believe that this confession was voluntarily made. It
was taken in my presence and hearing and was read over to the persons
making it and admitted by him to be correct, and it contains full and true
account of the statement made by him.
(7) The statement having been recorded; the accused is forwarded to .... The
Bombay High court....... in ...........Bombay.......

(Signature of Magistrate)
 WITNESS STATEMENT

Name: Prayag Soni Date of Birth: 18/10/1998 Age: 21

Address: 9, Ashok Nagar, Thane District City: Mumbai

State: Maharashtra Zip: 400080

Date: 25/08/2014 Time: 9:00 P.M.

Type of Incident: Murder Home Phone: N/A Cell Phone: 9414696024
Case # 10085

Please describe in detail what you saw:

I was coming back from my work on 05.04.2014 in a taxi. Suddenly the tire of the taxi got
deflated so I had to walk on foot to home. The clock was striking 8:30pm and I was around 1km
away from my house. The road was deserted and very little light was there on the road. I heard a
scream in nearby house and it was quite evident that someone was beating up somebody. I
sneaked into the house and peeped through the window. I saw that a middle-aged man was beating
up his wife and after striking with his elbow on her back he knocked her down and put his knee on
her chest and struck two or three violent blows on her face. The wife got unconscious and
probably died because of extravagance of blood in his brain either on the spot or shortly
afterwards. The husband got scared as she would not come round and after he confirmed her
death, he dragged her to the garden behind his house to cremate her. Then he collected some cash
and gold ornaments and absconded from the scene. I tried to catch him but he ran out of my hands
and I went to nearby police station as soon as possible and filed and FIR.

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in this matter shall be the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth and may be presented to a magistrate or a judge in
lieu of your sworn testimony at a preliminary examination. Any false statement you make
that you do not believe to be true may subject you to criminal punishment as a class “A”
misdemeanor.

THE ABOVE STATEMENTS WERE MADE BY ME OF MY OWN FREE WILL

SIGNATURE: DATE: 28/08/14 TIME: 9:35

WITNESS: Prayag Soni

 FORMAT FOR SEIZURE MEMO

SEIZURE MEMO

In pursuance of Section 26 of Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 a search of Mr. Shiva
was undertaken on (date): 29.09.2014.

During the search of Mr. Shiva’s house, the following material/evidences was recovered and
seized:

SL. Description of the Quantity Identification

NO Material/Documents seized with Mark
details of marking with specific
reference to Standard Mark
1. Gold worth of 250000 100 (g) N/A
2. Cash 75000 N/A
3. Stock market files 100000 N/A
4. Property files 2000000 N/A
5. Bank Statement 2500000 N/A
6. Silver 2 (kg) N/A

The material seized and sealed/packed as under: Section 102 of the CrPC.

Ravi Kumar
Name & Signature of the
inspecting officer (authorized for search by
CA)

WITNESSES:
(name & address)
Date - 09.04.2014

1. Saurabh Kataria, Godavari Complex

2. Ankita Bhatnagar, Avantika apartments

Page 1
 BAIL APPLICATION FORMAT INDIA UNDER SECTION 437 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE

BEFORE THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT RABODI POLICE STATION

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE OF BOMBAY

VS

SHIVA

FIR Number: 10085

Under Section: 301-304

Police Station: Rabodi

Accused under custody since: 05.04.2014

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 437 CRPC FOR GRANT OF BAIL ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:

Name: Shiva

Father’s Name: Ranveer

Address: Godavari Complex, Rabodi, Thane District.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED AS UNDER:

1. That the present FIR has been registered on false and bogus facts. The facts stated in the FIR are fabricated,
concocted and without any basis.

2. That the police have falsely implicated the applicant and arrested him in the present case, the applicant is a
respectable citizen of the society and is not involved any criminal case.

3. That the facts stated in the complainant against the applicant are civil disputes and does not constitute any criminal
offence at all.

4. That the applicant is not required in any kind of investigation nor any kind of custodial interrogation is required,
nor any recovery is to be made at the instance of the applicant.

5. That the applicant is having very good antecedents, he belongs to good family and there is no criminal case pending
against them.

6. That the applicant is a permanent resident and there are no chances of his absconding from the course of justice.

7. That the applicant undertakes to present himself before the police/court as and when directed.

8. That the applicant undertakes that he will not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police officer.

9. That the applicant further undertakes not to tamper with the evidence or the witnesses in any manner.

Page 2
10. That the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

11. That the applicant is ready and willing to accept any other conditions as may be imposed by the Court or the
police in connection with the case.

PRAYER
It is therefore prayed that the court may order for the release of the applicant on bail in the interest of justice.

Any other order which the court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be also
passed in favour of the applicant.

Applicant

Shiva

THROUGH
Shyamal Chand

Dated:

10.09.2014

Page 3
 FINAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
(U/s. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)
Court: IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT THANE

1. District : THANE
Police Station: RABODI
Year 2014
C.R. No. : 280/14
Date : 16.10.2014
2, Final report/Charge sheet No.: 0895347
3. Date : 25.10.2014
4 Provision : INDIAN PENAL CODE
1. Act : IPC Section: 300
2. Act : IPC Section: 302
3. Act : IPC Section: 349
4. Act : IPC Section: 350
5 Act : IPC Section: 351
5. Nature of Final Report : Charge sheet Filed
6. If Final report is of the nature of did not occur then the reasons: N/A
7. If Charge sheet is filed : Original
8. Name of the Investigating Officer : PSI AVINASH RANASHINGE
Designation of Investigating Officer: PSI, P.B.N. 3482
9. Name of Complainant/ Informant : PRAYAG SONI
Father’s/ Husband’s name : GAJENDRA SONI
10. Things obtained at the time of the investigation/ Confiscated and property relied upon/
details of the articles (if necessary, add a separate list along with the same)
Sr. Description of the Estimated Sr. no. of the Property Disposal
property value Police Station recovered from
record diary whom and from
where
1. GOLD 50000 5025 NA NA
CHAIN(Stolen)
2. ORNAMENTS 250000 5026 NA NA
(stolen)

11. Details of the Accused against whom charge sheet is filed

(if necessary, add a separate sheet)
1. Name & Age : SHIVA
2. Identified & how : BY WITNESS
3. Father/Husband’s name : RANVEER
4. Sex : MALE
5. Nationality : INDIAN

Page 4
 6. Passport No. : NA
Date of issuance : NA
7. Religion : HINDU
8. If belongs to SC/ST : NO
9. Profession : DRIVER
10. Address : ROOM NO.5, SHAKTI NAGAR,
KALWA, THANE 400 605
If verified : YES
11. Temporary offender No. : 26659/14
12. Regular Offender No. : N/A
(If known)
13. Date of Arrest : 17/12/2014
14. Date of release on bail : NA
15. Date of sending to Court : 18/12/2014
16. Provision of arrest : Ss. 300, 302, 349, 350, 351,
362, I.P.C.
17. Surety’s name & address :
18. Related previous conviction: NIL
19. Condition of the Accused : JUDICIAL CUSTODY

12. Details of the examined witnesses :

Sr Name Father/ Age Occupation Address Nature of being
Husband’s name (yrs.) a witness
1 JUI SITARAM SITARAM 19 Student ROOM NO. 3, INFORMANT
SHINDE GUNIRAM yrs. 2ND FLOOR,
SHINDE KRISHNA
NIWAS,
VITTHALWADI,
THANE 400 601
2 RAMESH HARI HARI GANU 30 yrs. Business 2ND FLOOR, P. W. 1
SALUNKE SALUNKE MATRU
CHHAYA,
KARVE RD.,
HANUMAN
NAGAR, THANE
3 KAMLESH GOVIND 26 yrs. Constable 420, ROOP P. W. 2
GOVIND BABAN MAHAL, PREM
SONAWANE SONAWANE GALLI,
KALWA,
THANE

Page 5
4 SHIVA RANVEER Driver ROOM NO.5, ACCUSED
SHAKTI
NAGAR,
KALWA,
THANE 400 605
PSI AVINASH ABHAY 35 yrs. P.S.I. INVESTIGATING
OFFICER
RANASHIGE RANASHINGE

14. Mention the action taken u/s. 182 /211 of the Indian Penal Code if the
first information is false
15. Findings of Lab testing: N/A
16. Short description of the incident:

The accused named Shiva knocked down her wife and put a knee on her chest and stuck
her two or 3 hard blows on her face with the closed fist and as a consequence she died
either on the spot or very shortly afterwards. The accused absconded from the crime place.
He killed her over a trifling issue.

The following morning, the police picked up the accused Shiva was alleged to have
committed the murder of her wife last night. The accused cremated the body in the house.

The police presented him the next day in the Magistrate’s Court and recorded his
statement in the presence of the Honorable Magistrate.

Therefore the Ld. Public Prosecutor be pleased to frame the following charges
before this Hon’ble Court.

17. If notice is issued to concerned person : NA

Dated : NA
18. Date of sending the notice : NA

Endorsed by the Senior Officer/ Officer presenting the

Station House officer Final Report
Sd/- Sd/-

Name: API AJAY RATHOD Name: PSI AVINASH RANASHIGE

Designation: API Designation: PSI

Page 6
 Framing of Charges
(Charges Under Section 211)

Principle Laws Laid Down in This Case:

1. The offence is culpable homicide if the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is likely to
cause death and it is murder if such injury is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature
to cause death.

2. Where there is an intention to kill, it is always a murder.

3. Where the offence is culpable homicide or murder, depends upon the degrees of risk of
human life.

4. The offence is culpable homicide if the death is caused with the knowledge that the act
is likely to cause death and it is murder if the death is caused with the knowledge that
the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death.

Court of Session: on the basis of the facts mentioned, the learned session judge tried the
accused and found him guilty of murder and sentenced him to death and the case was sent
to the Bombay High Court for confirmation of the sentence.

High Court: Applying the principles of law to the facts of the case his lordship was of the
opinion that the offence committed by the accused was not murder but culpable homicide
not amounting to murder i.e., One under part 1 of section 304 I.P.C. and not under section
302 I.P.C. and his lordship accordingly sentenced him to transportation for seven years.

Page 7
 Arguments of The Case

In Bombay High Court there arose differences of opinion between two judges as to what
offence the prisoner had committed and accordingly the case was referred to third judge
named Melville in order to decide the question whether the offence committed by the
prisoner was murder of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Delivering the
judgment of the High Court he compared section 299 and section 300 of IPC and pointed
out the difference between the two.
The learned justice ruled out the applicability of clauses (1) and (3) of section 300 by
stating that the facts and circumstance of the case did neither show intention to cause death
not the bodily injury intended to be inflected was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature
to cause death. Mr. justice Melville discussed the two-section clause by clause and
attempted to bring out the differences between the two offences clearly in the following
manner:

Section 299.

A person commits culpable homicide, if the act by which the death is caused is done

(a) With the intention of causing death;

(b) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death:

(c) With the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.

Section 300.

Subject to certain exceptions, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is
done (1) With the intention of causing death;

(2) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the
death of the person to whom the harm is caused;

(3) With the intention of causing bodily injury to any person, and the bodily injury intended to be
inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death;

(4) With the knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause
death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

Page 8
 Judgment Writing
(U/s. 265 of the Code of Criminal Procedure)

Melville J.

1. I understand that these proceedings have been referred to me under Section 271-B of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, in order that I may decide whether the offence committed by the prisoner was
murder, or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

2. For convenience of comparison, the provisions of Sections 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code
may be stated thus:

Section 299.

A person commits culpable homicide, if the act by which the death is caused is done

(a) With the intention of causing death;

(b) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death:

(c) With the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.

Section 300.

Subject to certain exceptions, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is
done (1) With the intention of causing death;

(2) With the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the
death of the person to whom the harm is caused;

(3) With the intention of causing bodily injury to any person, and the bodily injury intended to be
inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death;

(4) With the knowledge that the act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause
death, or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

3. I have underlined the words which appear to me to mark the differences between the two offences.

4. (a) and (1) show that where there is an intention to kill, the offence is always murder.

5. (c) and (4) appear to me intended to apply (I do not say that they are necessarily limited) to cases
in which there is no intention to cause death or bodily injury. Furious driving, firing at a mark near a
public road, would be cases of this description. Whether the offence is culpable homicide or murder,
depends upon the degree of risk to human life. If death is a likely result, it is culpable homicide; if it
is the most probable result, it is murder.

6. The essence of (2) appears to me to be found in the words which I have underlined. The offence is
murder, if the offender knows that the particular person injured is likely, either from peculiarity of
constitution, or immature age, or other special circumstance, to be killed by an injury which would
not ordinarily cause death. The illustration given in the section is the following:

A, knowing that Z is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes
him with intention of causing bodily injury. Z dies in consequence of the blow. A is guilty of murder,

Page 9
although the blow might not have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death
of a person in a sound state of health.

7. There remain to be considered (b) and (3), and it is on a comparison of these two clauses that the
decision of doubtful cases like the present must generally depend. The offence is culpable homicide,
if the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is likely to cause death; it is murder, if such injury is
sufficient in the, ordinary course of nature to cause death. The distinction is fine, but appreciable. It
is much the same distinction as that between (c) and (4), already noticed. It is a question of degree of
probability. Practically, I think, it will generally resolve itself into a consideration of the nature of the
weapon used. A blow from the fist or a stick on a vital part may be likely to cause death; a wound
from a sword in a vital part is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

8. In the present case the prisoner, a young man of 18, appears to have kicked his wife, (a girl of 15)
and to have struck her several times with his fist on the back. These blows seem to have caused her
no serious injury. She, however, fell on the ground, and I think that the evidence shows that the
prisoner then put one knee on her chest, and struck her two or three times on the face. One or two of
these blows, which, from the medical evidence, I believe to have been violent and to have been
delivered with the closed fist, took effect on the girl's left eye, producing contusion and discoloration.
The skull was not fractured, but the blow caused an extravasation of blood on the brain, and the girl
died in consequence either on the spot, or very shortly afterwards. On this state of facts the Sessions
Judge and the assessors have found the prisoner guilty of murder, and he has been sentenced to
death. I am myself of opinion that the offence is culpable homicide, and not murder. I do not think
there was an intention to cause death; nor do I think that the bodily injury was sufficient in the
ordinary course of nature to cause death. Ordinarily, I. think, it would not cause death. But a violent
blow in the eye from a man's fist, while the person struck is lying with his or her head on the ground,
is certainly likely to cause death, either by producing concussion or extravasation of blood on the
surface or in the substance of the brain. A reference to Taylor's Medical Jurisprudence (Fourth
Edition, page 294) will show how easily life may be destroyed by a blow on the head producing
extravasation of blood.

9. For these reasons I am of opinion that the prisoner should be convicted of culpable homicide not
amounting to murder, and I would sentence him to transportation for seven years.

10. This order was accordingly passed by the Court.

Page
10