Bombay High Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Culpable Homicide in Sudden Quarrel Case. Accused's act of causing death with wooden plank during sudden provocation held not murder but culpable homicide under Section 304(I) IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 63
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Pandharinath Shinde, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, for the murder of Pradeep under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on the night of 25/26 March 1999, the deceased Pradeep attempted to have illicit relations with Smt. Kantabai, who was sleeping in the courtyard of her house. The appellant, who was sleeping inside the house, heard her shouts, came out, picked up a wooden plank, and gave two blows on Pradeep's head, causing his death. The appellant then dragged the body to an open space and later spread cattle dung to conceal bloodstains. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC. On appeal, the High Court examined whether the offence fell under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. The court noted that the appellant acted on sudden provocation during a sudden quarrel, without premeditation, and did not act in a cruel or unusual manner. Therefore, the court altered the conviction to Section 304(I) IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and maintained the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-. The appeal was partly allowed.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder - Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC - Sudden Quarrel - The appellant, on hearing the deceased attempting to establish illicit relations with a woman, came out and gave two blows with a wooden plank on the head of the deceased, causing death. The court held that the act was done in a sudden quarrel without premeditation and the appellant did not act in a cruel or unusual manner, thus the case falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and is punishable under Section 304(I) IPC. (Paras 1-5)

B) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Section 304(I) IPC - The trial court had convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC but the High Court altered the conviction to Section 304(I) IPC and maintained the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-. (Paras 1, 5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC is sustainable or whether the offence falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and is punishable under Section 304(I) IPC.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is partly allowed. The conviction under Section 302 IPC is altered to one under Section 304(I) IPC. The sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- is maintained.

Law Points

  • Culpable homicide not amounting to murder
  • Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC
  • Sudden quarrel
  • Grave and sudden provocation
  • Section 304(I) IPC
  • Section 302 IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (BOM) (09) 23

Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 2000

2014-09-29

T.V. Nalawade, J.

Mr. K.B. Autade (for appellant), Mr. D.R. Kale (APP for State)

Pandharinath s/o. Ratan Shinde

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal or reduction of sentence.

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted by trial court for murder; he appealed against the conviction and sentence.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment; High Court altered conviction to Section 304(I) IPC and maintained sentence of seven years RI.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable or the offence falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and is punishable under Section 304(I) IPC.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the act was done in a sudden quarrel without premeditation and thus falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. State argued that the conviction under Section 302 IPC was correct.

Ratio Decidendi

When a death is caused during a sudden quarrel without premeditation and the offender does not act in a cruel or unusual manner, the offence falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and is punishable under Section 304(I) IPC, not Section 302 IPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant is convicted and sentenced by the Trial court for offence punishable under section 304 (I) of I.P.C. Accused/appellant was sleeping inside of the house of Smt. Kantabai at the relevant time. Accused then dragged Pradeep towards open space situated in front of liquor shop, at the distance of 100 to 150 ft.

Procedural History

The appellant was tried in Sessions Case No. 109/1999 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed to the High Court. The High Court partly allowed the appeal, altering the conviction to Section 304(I) IPC and maintaining the sentence of seven years RI.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 304(I), 300 Exception 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Petition Challenging Gratuity Payment Order. Employer Cannot Withhold Gratuity Under Section 4(6) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Without Termination of Service for Willful Omission or Negligence.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Alters Conviction from Murder to Culpable Homicide in Sudden Quarrel Case. Accused's act of causing death with wooden plank during sudden provocation held not murder but culpable homicide under Section 304(I) IPC.