Mumbai A man, who was earlier convicted for the murder of his mother, has successfully managed to change his conviction to culpable homicide. The reason- the Bombay high court (HC) was informed that it was not a premeditated attack. Rather, in a fit of rage, he killed her as she failed to cook fish and potatoes for him on the special occasion of Holi.
The incident took place in March 2011. Naresh Pawar and his mother Ekabai worked in a brick kiln in Niljepada village, Kalyan. Since it was Holi, both of them were home and in the evening, Ekabai served him brinjal and potatoes for dinner. Apparently, Pawar had already eaten brinjal earlier in the day and was enraged over the lack of variety. What made him even angrier was the under-cooked potatoes.
Fuming over the choice of dinner, Naresh questioned his mother as to why she had not cooked fish and picked up an iron rod lying near the kiln and whacked her on her back with it. Upon hearing the commotion, the son of the kiln owner rushed to the spot along with another person. When they checked on the mother, they realised that she was already dead.
The division bench of justice Prasanna Varale and justice Shrikant Kulkarni, which was hearing the appeal against the murder conviction, was informed by advocate Sushil Inamdar that the convict had hit his mother in a fit of rage and he had neither planned it nor did he intend to murder her. Inamdar submitted that though the death was homicidal and the medical reports were also not disputed, the conviction should have been for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
During the trial, in light of witness statements and medical reports, the court at Kalyan had found Pawar guilty of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Pawar was lodged at Kolhapur central prison for nine years after which he lodged the appeal.
Additional public prosecutor J H Dedhia for the state however opposed the appeal and stated that the trial court had not erred in reaching the conclusion that it was murder and hence the appeal should be dismissed.
After hearing all submissions, the bench noted that as the assault and medical reports were not disputed in the appeal, it was upholding the argument of the appellant of hitting the mother in a fit of anger and without the intention of killing her and his act was in response to her preparing a meal of brinjal and potatoes that were not cooked properly.
In light of this, the bench observed that the nine years Pawar had spent in jail would be considered as his conviction and said, “The appeal is partly allowed. The conviction recorded against the appellant is hereby set aside and the conviction of the Appellant-Accused is altered under Section 304(II) of IPC for the period which the Appellant-Accused has undergone the sentence in the prison.”