Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, heard a criminal appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the Sessions Judge, Gondia. The appellant, a labourer, was convicted for the murder of his mother Sevantabai and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution alleged that on the morning of 13 June 2016, the appellant quarrelled with his wife Urmila suspecting her character. When his mother intervened to protect the wife, the appellant struck her on the head with a stone (warwanta), causing her death. The appellant did not dispute his presence or the incident but argued through counsel that the conviction under Section 302 IPC was not justified. He contended that the incident occurred without premeditation in the course of a sudden fight in the heat of passion, and that at most the case fell under Section 304-II IPC. The State opposed the appeal, relying on the eyewitness testimony of Urmila and arguing that the appellant intended to kill his mother or acted cruelly. The High Court examined the evidence and found that there was no intention to kill the mother; the appellant’s grievance was against his wife, and the mother’s interference provoked the sudden assault. The court noted that the evidence showed a sudden fight without premeditation, and that the appellant did not act in a cruel or unusual manner. It further observed that the medical evidence did not state that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, which, while not the sole factor, supported the conclusion that the case fell under Section 304-II. The court also rejected the State’s argument that the alternative defence could not be raised because it was not taken during trial or under Section 313 CrPC, holding that the accused could rely on exceptions to Section 300 IPC if the evidence supported it, and the burden could be discharged through preponderance of probability. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed: the conviction under Section 302 was set aside and substituted with conviction under Section 304-II IPC, and the sentence was reduced from life imprisonment to eight years rigorous imprisonment. The fine and default sentence imposed by the trial court were maintained.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder - Exception 4 to Section 300, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sudden Fight - Lack of Premeditation - Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside when evidence shows no premeditation and incident occurred in sudden fight - Held that appellant had no intention to kill mother but had knowledge that act likely to cause death; conviction under Section 304-II IPC warranted (Paras 9-12, 16, 18). B) Criminal Law - Alternative Defence - Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Accused not precluded from raising alternative defence if evidence on record supports it; burden on accused can be discharged by preponderance of probability from prosecution evidence - Held that failure to set up specific defence does not foreclose right to rely on exception (Paras 14-15). C) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Section 304-II, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Reduction of sentence - Sentence of life imprisonment altered to 8 years rigorous imprisonment considering facts and precedents - Held that interests of justice met with 8 years rigorous imprisonment (Paras 17-18). D) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Absence of certification that injury sufficient to cause death is a factor but not sole factor for altering conviction - Held that absence of such statement in post-mortem report is one of the factors though not sole factor (Paras 13-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable or should be altered to Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code given the circumstances of a sudden fight and absence of intention to kill.
Final Decision
Appeal partly allowed. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside and substituted with conviction under Section 304-II IPC. Sentence of life imprisonment set aside; appellant sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 8 years. Fine of Rs. 2000/- and default sentence of four months maintained. Impugned judgment and order dated 02/04/2018 modified accordingly.
Law Points
- Sudden fight in heat of passion
- lack of premeditation
- absence of intention to kill
- knowledge that act likely to cause death
- conviction under Section 304-II IPC sustainable
- alternative defence not precluded
- burden on accused discharged by preponderance of probability
- absence of medical certification on injury sufficiency is relevant factor but not sole factor
