Indian Law Society’s

ILS Law College

ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS

LAW OF CRIMES

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

RAHUL WAGHMARE …APPELLANT

Versus

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA …RESPONDENT

FACTUAL MATRIX

1. On 15.10.2024, PSI Suresh Patil (“Complainant”) was discharging his patrolling duty near
Shivajinagar Railway Station. At about 11:40 am he reached outside the Shivajinagar Railway
Station and saw a crowd. He went there and saw one person holding a blood-stained bamboo
in his hand and another person lying on the ground with blood oozing out of his head.

2. One person from the crowd named Manil Kumar then said that he knew the injured, Salim
Mohammad (“deceased”). He said that a quarrel had taken place between the deceased and
the accused and the accused had assaulted the deceased.

3. Thereafter PSI Suresh Patil immediately caught the accused, whose name on inquiry was
revealed to be Rahul Waghmare. At the same time Mobile Van 1 of the Shivaji Nagar Police
Station arrived there and the accused was handed over by the Complainant to PSI Neelesh Apte
and he was taken to the police station. Thereafter, the Complainant shifted the deceased, who
was unconscious to Sassoon Hospital with the help of his friend Bilal Ali.

4. On the basis of the said information, the Complainant filed an FIR vide C.R No. 154 of 2024
dated 15.10.2024 u/s 109 and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”) at the Shivaji
Nagar Police Station.

5. Thereafter the investigation was handed over to Senior PI Vilas Shirke (“Investigating
Officer”).

6. During the investigation, 5 days after the incident, the deceased succumbed to his injuries and
died on 20.10.2024. The post-mortem report stated that the cause of death was “head injury
(unnatural)”.

7. During investigation, it was revealed that the Accused was a porter (hamal) who worked at
Shivajinagar Railway Station. The deceased was his friend who also worked with him as a
porter (hamal).

Page | 2
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

8. The Accused had lent Rs. 10,000 to the deceased as he was in dire need of money. For months,
the Accused kept asking the deceased for the money, but he kept making excuses and did not
return it.

9. On the day of the incident, 15.10.2024, at around 11:30 am, the Accused once again asked the
deceased for the money that he owed. The deceased got very angry as the Accused asked him
for the money in front of many people. He had taken out a pocket knife from his pocket, pushed
the Accused on his chest and said, “zyada shana kyu ban raha hai, ja paise wapas nahi dunga
ab”. (Why are you being over-smart, go, I will not return your money now).

10. Hearing this, the Accused had pushed the deceased, causing the deceased to move a few steps
behind. The Accused had then picked up a bamboo lying on the road, and hit the deceased with
it on his head. Thereafter, the deceased fell on the ground and blood was oozing from his head.
At this point, at 11:40 am, the Complainant reached the spot of the incident.

11. The investigating officer recorded the statement of three eye witnesses who were present on
the spot.

12. Thereafter, after completion of investigation, chargesheet against the accused was filed on
01.12.2024 under Section 101 and 352 BNS and the case was committed to the Shivaji Nagar
Sessions Court for trial.

13. The Prosecutor examined the Complainant, the three eye witnesses, the autopsy surgeon and
the investigating officer as prosecution witnesses.

14. During the trial, the post-mortem report was exhibited as “Exhibit 1” by the Court.

15. The statement of the Accused u/s 351 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter
“BNSS”) was recorded. No defence witnesses were examined.

16. On the basis of the evidence led in court, the Shivajinagar Sessions Court passed the following
order on 10.05.2025:

Page | 3
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

A. Accused Rahul Waghmare is Convicted for an offence punishable under Section 101 BNS
in C.R. No. 154 of 2024 of Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Pune and sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000.
B. Accused Rahul Waghmare is Acquitted for the offence under Section 352 BNS in C.R.
No. 154 of 2024 of Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Pune.

17. The Hon’ble Sessions Court passed the above-mentioned order on the following grounds:

A. The prosecution proved that the deceased died a homicidal death.

B. The prosecution proved that on 15.10.2024 at about 11:30 am, the accused committed the
intentional murder of the deceased by means of a bamboo.

C. The prosecution did not prove that on the above date and time, the accused intentionally
insulted the deceased and gave him provocation, intending that such provocation will cause
him to break the public peace.

18. The Accused has filed an appeal in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court vide Criminal Appeal No.
251 of 2025 challenging the judgement of the Shivajinagar Sessions Court dated 10.05.2025.

19. The following issues were framed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court at the time of admission
of the case:

I. Whether the ingredients of the offence under Section 101 BNS have been made out in the
present case?

II. Whether any defence under the BNS is available to the accused for an acquittal or an
alternative sentence?

Participants may choose to argue from the side of the Accused Rahul Waghmare (Applicant) or
the State of Maharashtra (Respondent) at the final hearing of the appeal before the Bombay High
Court.

Note: Participants may choose to frame additional sub-issues. For the sake of brevity, only the
relevant evidence is annexed to the moot problem.

Page | 4
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

ANNEXURE A

Exhibit 1

Memorandum of Post - Mortem Examination held at Sassoon Hospital, Pune

1) General Particulars

a) Name of deceased - Salim Mohammad

b) Age - 32 years

c) By whom was the corpse sent - Senior PI, Vilas Shirke

d) Date and hour of receipt - 20.10.2024 at 1 pm

e) Date and hour of beginning of post-mortem - 20.10.2024 at 1:30 pm

f) Date and hour of ending of post-mortem - 20.10.2024 at 2:30 pm

2) Surface wounds and injuries - Their nature, position, dimension (measured) and directions
to be accurately stated - their probable age and cause to be noted.

a) Partially healed dry wound of size 7 cm x 1 cm present over left temporal region.

b) Abraded contusion of size 3 cm x 2 cm present below right eye, brown in colour.

3) Internal Examination

a) Linear undisplaced fracture is seen through the root of bilateral sphenoid sinuses
reaching the medial wall of superior orbital tissue.

b) Linear undisplaced fracture is seen running across the left middle cranial fossa
along the temporal bone.

Page | 5
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

4) Opinion as to the Cause of Death - Head injury (unnatural).

Dr. R.R. Wagh Dr. Rekha Rao

Resident Doctor Assistant Professor

Department of Forensic Medicine Department of Forensic Medicine

Sassoon Hospital Sassoon Hospital

Dated: 20.10.2024

Page | 6
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

ANNEXURE B

DEPOSITION OF PROSECUTION WITNESS (PW) NO. 1 FOR STATE

I DO HEREBY STATE ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION AS UNDER:

Name: Manil Kumar

Age: 37 years

Occupation: Fruit Vendor

Address: Bhosale Nagar, Pune

__________________________________________________________________

Examination in chief by Ld. Additional Public Prosecutor for the State: -

(Accused Rahul Waghmare is presented through video conferencing from Yerawada Central
Prison).

1. I am a fruit seller outside the Shivajinagar Railway Station. My stall is across the street
from the main entrance of the railway station on the footpath.

2. I usually open my stall at 10 AM every day and close it at 7 PM. I come every day of the
week and I don't set up my stall anywhere else.

3. I was present on 15.10.2024 as usual on the spot. I had come to open my stall at 10 AM at
my regular place across the street.

4. In an hour or so, Salim started arguing loudly with someone and everyone in the area heard
the quarrel as they were abusing each other loudly. Soon we understood that they were
fighting because Salim had taken money from that person.

(PW1 shown the Accused who is present via video conference)

Page | 7
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

5. The person on the video conference was the person that was quarrelling with Salim.

6. After some time, the Accused asked Salim for money. Salim got irritated with this and
pulled out a pocket knife from his pocket and said “jyada shana mat ban, warna tujhe dekh
lunga”.

7. The Accused then pushed Salim back too, picked up a bamboo fallen on the road and hit
Salim on his head with the bamboo. Salim fell on the ground and blood was oozing from
his head. We ran to Salim to pick him up but by that time one police person had come and
Salim was taken to the hospital.

8. The accused was trying to run away, but was caught by the police.

9. I can identify the bamboo if shown to me. The bamboo now shown to me is the same,
which was lying on the road, and the accused picked it up to assault Salim. The bamboo is
marked as “Article A”.

10. Police had recorded my statement. Police had explained my Marathi statement to me in
Hindi.

Examination in Chief ended.

Cross Examination by Advocate for the Accused: -

1. It is true to say that I knew the deceased Salim Mohammad because he used to work as a
coolie (porter) at the railway station. He would often talk to me and other vendors in the
area.

2. It is true to say that he had told me he was in need of money. He has told me this himself
as he had asked me to lend him money. I did not lend him any money.

3. It is true to say that I knew that the deceased used to carry a pocket knife usually. I had
seen the pocket knife with him a few times before.

4. It is true to say that the deceased used to ask for money from a lot of people often and used
to get into a lot of fights over this.

Page | 8
 ANNUAL RAGHAVENDRA PHADNIS INTRA-COLLEGE MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2025

5. It is not true to say that I was not present at my stall on the day and time of the incident.

6. It is not true to say that I have not seen the incident.

7. It is not true to say that the Accused did not hit Salim.

8. It is not true to say that I am deposing falsely today to support the police.

Cross examination ended.

(PW2 and PW3 have corroborated the testimony of PW1)

This moot proposition has been drafted by Ms. Chandni Chawla (Batch of 2017, ILS Law College,
Pune), Advocate, Bombay High Court and Founder of Chambers of Chandni Chawla and Ms.
Anuya Deokar, (Batch of 2022, DES, Pune University), Advocate, Bombay High Court.

Page | 9