Case Note & Summary
The judgment arises from a criminal appeal and revision against the conviction of the accused under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case was that on 11.02.2004, the accused gave a single blow with a stick on the head of the deceased Sharad, who died on 22.02.2004 in hospital. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.75,000/-. The accused appealed against the conviction, and the informant (wife of deceased) filed a revision for enhancement of sentence. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of eyewitnesses and medical evidence. The court found that the accused had no intention to cause death but had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death. The court also considered Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC (sudden fight) but held it inapplicable as the accused used a dangerous weapon on a vital part. The court upheld the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC and dismissed both the appeal and the revision.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder - Section 304 Part II IPC - Single blow - Knowledge likely to cause death - The accused gave a single blow with a stick on the head of the deceased, who died after 11 days. The court held that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death, and therefore the conviction under Section 304 Part II was proper. (Paras 1-30)
B) Criminal Law - Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - Sudden fight - Not applicable - The incident occurred on a sudden quarrel without premeditation, but the accused used a dangerous weapon (stick) and gave a blow on a vital part (head), so Exception 4 was not attracted. (Paras 15-20)
C) Criminal Law - Common intention - Section 34 IPC - Not applicable - There was no evidence of common intention between the accused and any other person, as the accused acted alone. (Paras 21-25)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code for causing death by a single blow is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed both the appeal and the revision, upholding the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC and the sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.75,000/-.
Law Points
- Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Single blow
- Knowledge likely to cause death
- No intention to cause death
- Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC
- Common intention
- Section 34 IPC
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (06) 199
Criminal Appeal No.352 of 2009 with Criminal Revision Application No.55 of 2010
Shri A.K. Bhangde for the appellant/non-applicant No.1, Shri Amit Chutke, APP for the respondent/State
Siddharth s/o Sukhdeo Rangari (in Criminal Appeal No.352 of 2009) and Smt. Babikala Wd/o Sharad Deshbhratar (in Criminal Revision Application No.55 of 2010)
State of Maharashtra (in both matters) and Siddharth s/o Sukhdeo Rangari (in revision)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction and revision for enhancement of sentence in a murder case.
Remedy Sought
The accused sought acquittal in the appeal; the informant sought enhancement of sentence in the revision.
Filing Reason
The accused was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC for causing death by a single blow; the informant sought higher sentence.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur) convicted the accused under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.75,000/-.
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is sustainable.
Whether the sentence imposed is adequate or requires enhancement.
Submissions/Arguments
The accused argued that the death was caused by a single blow in a sudden quarrel without premeditation, and Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC should apply, reducing the offence to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
The informant argued that the accused intended to cause death and should have been convicted under Section 302 IPC, or at least given a higher sentence under Section 304 Part II.
Ratio Decidendi
A single blow on a vital part with a dangerous weapon, without intention to cause death but with knowledge that it is likely to cause death, constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC. Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC is not attracted when the weapon used is dangerous and the blow is on a vital part.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.75,000/-.
The accused gave a single blow with a stick on the head of the deceased, who died after 11 days. The court held that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death but without any intention to cause death.
Procedural History
The trial court convicted the accused under Section 304 Part II IPC on 11.06.2009. The accused filed Criminal Appeal No.352 of 2009 against the conviction, and the informant filed Criminal Revision Application No.55 of 2010 for enhancement of sentence. Both were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment on 20.06.2023.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 304 Part II, 324, 34
