Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Narsinh Arjun Jadhav, was convicted by the Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, for the murder of Rajesh Kanojiya under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to life imprisonment. The incident occurred on the night of 11 January 2004, when a trivial quarrel over wastage of water from a municipal tap escalated. The accused, enraged by the deceased's challenge, came out with a kitchen knife and stabbed the deceased multiple times, including on the back while the deceased was fleeing. The deceased succumbed to his injuries. The prosecution examined eyewitnesses, including Pappu Ramsurat Rajbhar (PW1) and Shantidevi Rammurat Rajbhar (PW3), who corroborated the sequence of events. The accused did not challenge the fact that he caused the fatal injuries but argued that the offence should be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, citing sudden provocation, trivial quarrel, and absence of premeditation. The High Court, after analyzing the evidence, held that the accused's actions—using a deadly weapon, chasing the deceased, and inflicting multiple blows—indicated an intention to cause death and that he took undue advantage, thereby not satisfying the conditions of Exception 4. The court upheld the conviction under Section 302 IPC and dismissed the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction - Appeal against conviction for murder - Accused stabbed deceased multiple times after a trivial quarrel over wastage of water - Held that the case does not fall under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC as the accused used a deadly weapon and inflicted multiple blows, indicating intention to cause death (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide - Exception 4 of Section 300 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sudden Provocation - Trivial Quarrel - For Exception 4 to apply, the act must be committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight, in the heat of passion, and without the offender taking undue advantage - Held that the accused's act of stabbing the deceased multiple times, including on the back while fleeing, constitutes taking undue advantage, thus Exception 4 is not attracted (Paras 8-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the offence committed by the appellant/accused falls under Exception 4 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and thus constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder, or whether it amounts to murder under Section 302 IPC.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction under Section 302 IPC and sentence of life imprisonment upheld.
Law Points
- Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
- Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC
- Sudden provocation
- Trivial quarrel
- Absence of premeditation
- Intention to cause death
