Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Akram Khan Sirajulhaq, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of Hamjamiya @ Babu Abdul Karim and sentenced to life imprisonment. The incident occurred on 27 January 1991 at about 8:30 p.m. near a urinal behind the house of PW2 Mohd. Adil Ansari in Borivali, Mumbai. The deceased had an extra-marital relationship with Ayesha Begum, who later married the appellant. On the day of the incident, a quarrel broke out between the deceased and the appellant, during which the appellant stabbed the deceased with a button knife. The deceased was taken to Bhagwati Hospital where he was declared dead. The appellant was caught by the mob and beaten, and later arrested. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence, including the testimonies of eyewitnesses PW2 and PW3, and the medical evidence. The court noted that the incident arose from a sudden quarrel without premeditation, and the appellant did not have the intention to cause death. The court found that the eyewitnesses were not wholly reliable and their testimonies contained contradictions. The court held that the offence did not amount to murder under Section 302 IPC but fell under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, making it culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The court altered the conviction to one under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced the appellant to the period already undergone (about 8 years), and set aside the fine. The appellant was ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Conviction set aside - The appellant was convicted for murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing the deceased with a button knife. The High Court held that the incident occurred on a sudden quarrel without premeditation, and the prosecution failed to prove that the appellant had the intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. The conviction was altered to one under Section 304 Part II IPC. (Paras 1-20) B) Criminal Law - Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - Sudden quarrel - The court applied Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, which reduces culpable homicide not amounting to murder when the act is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel. The court found that the quarrel between the deceased and the appellant was sudden and there was no premeditation. (Paras 15-18) C) Evidence Act - Eyewitness testimony - Unreliable - The court found that the eyewitnesses (PW2 and PW3) were not wholly reliable as their testimonies contained contradictions and improvements. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt on the charge of murder. (Paras 10-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for murder is sustainable on the basis of the evidence on record, and whether the offence falls under any of the exceptions to Section 300 IPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is partly allowed. The conviction under Section 302 IPC is set aside and the appellant is convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC. The sentence is reduced to the period already undergone (about 8 years). The fine of Rs.1000/- is set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 304 Part I IPC
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Sudden quarrel
- Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC
- Lack of intention
- Unreliable eyewitness testimony
- Benefit of doubt
