Back
B. R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Hare Ram Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
The court has clarified that unintentional homicide does not constitute murder under Section 302 of the IPC (!) .
Witnesses who are relatives of the deceased cannot be dismissed solely on that ground; their testimonies must be scrutinized with greater caution and circumspection (!) .
The evidence from five witnesses, despite thorough cross-examination, remained consistent and unshaken in their testimony that the appellant caused the death of the deceased (!) .
The incident was provoked by a trivial issue, and there was no premeditation involved. The appellant lost control and assaulted the deceased in a heat of passion, which is a crucial consideration in the court’s decision (!) (!) .
The court found that the incident was a sudden quarrel resulting from provocation, and it involved only a single injury. There was no evidence of cruelty or undue advantage taken by the appellant (!) .
Consequently, the appellant's conviction was converted from Section 302 of the IPC to Part-I of Section 304 of the IPC, which pertains to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (!) .
The appellant had already served approximately nine years and ten months in prison with remission, and the court deemed that the sentence already undergone was sufficient to serve justice. Therefore, the appellant was sentenced to period already served and ordered to be released forthwith, provided he is not required in any other case (!) (!) .
The appeal was partly allowed, and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance regarding this case.
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 20th August 2024 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 237 of 2019 vide which the appeal filed by the appellant has been dismissed and the judgment and order dated 30th January 2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Saran convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’) and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life, has been affirmed.
3. Shorn of details, the facts giving rise to the appeal are as under:
(1) Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.(2) Merely because witnesses are relatives, cannot be a ground to discard testimony of such witnesses – Only requirement is that test....
Homicide committed in a sudden fight, in heat of passion and upon a sudden quarrel, is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
Unintentional homicide committed in a sudden fight in heat of passion, upon a sudden quarrel, is punishable under Part-I of Section 304 IPC.
Murder – Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC (Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023).
The court established that a lack of premeditation and intention to kill in a sudden quarrel can lead to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
Murder – Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
The court modified conviction from murder to culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC, establishing that the incident arose from sudden provocation and was not premeditated.
Murder – Unintentional homicide is not murder within Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the injury, the presence of a motive prior to the incident, and the absence of provocation are crucial factors in determining th....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
