Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ajay Vishnupant Udgiri, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No. 208 of 1993 for offences punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 135(i) of the Bombay Police Act. The appellant was originally charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. At trial, the appellant (accused no.1) was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC, while accused no.2 was acquitted. The deceased, Krishna, suffered a stab injury on the chest 4 inches below the left nipple, which was cavity deep and caused a puncture to the heart, leading to death due to shock and haemorrhage. The appellant also sustained simple abrasions. The High Court noted that the assault was not a product of provocation but occurred in the heat of the moment during a sudden quarrel. The court observed that the appellant acted in defence of another victim and, in the extreme hurry, could not be expected to possess fine accuracy as to the site of the assault. The court held that the appellant exceeded the right of private defence and altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC. Considering that the appellant had already undergone 10 years of imprisonment, the court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. The appeal was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Right of Private Defence - Exceeding Right of Private Defence - Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant inflicted a single knife blow on the chest of the deceased during a sudden quarrel, causing a stab injury that punctured the heart. The court held that the appellant acted in the heat of the moment and exceeded the right of private defence, as the injuries on the accused indicated a scuffle. The conviction was altered from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC. (Paras 8-10) B) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide - Sentencing - Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court considered the nature of the injury, the absence of premeditation, and the fact that the appellant had already undergone 10 years of imprisonment. The sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. (Para 10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC was sustainable or whether the case fell under any exception to murder, particularly the right of private defence.
Final Decision
The appeal is partly allowed. The conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC is maintained, but the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone (10 years). The conviction under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act is also maintained.
Law Points
- Right of private defence
- Exceeding right of private defence
- Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
- Section 304 Part II IPC
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Section 135 Bombay Police Act
