SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(AP) 1087

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
K.C. Banu and Anis, JJ.
Billa Murali - Appellants
Vs.
State of A.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 965 of 2009
Decided On: 21.01.2014

Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Ammaji Nettem, Counsel
For Respondents/Defendant: Public Prosecutor

Culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-I IPC requires the following ingredients: (i) the death of the person must have been caused (ii) such death must have been caused by the act of the accused by causing bodily injury (iii) there must be an intention on the part of the accused viz., (a) to cause death or (b) to cause such bodily injury which is likely to cause death.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - CONVICTION - MODIFICATION - SECTION 304 PART-I IPC - COMPENSATION - AWARDED

Fact of the Case:

Appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murdering his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. He appealed the conviction.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant did not intend to kill his wife, but rather that he acted in the heat of the moment during a quarrel. The court also found that the appellant had no pre-meditation and that he did not take undue advantage of the situation.

Issues: Whether the appellant intended to kill his wife; Whether the appellant acted in the heat of the moment during a quarrel; Whether the appellant had pre-meditation; Whether the appellant took undue advantage of the situation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant was guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-I IPC. The court found that the appellant did not intend to kill his wife, but rather that he acted in the heat of the moment during a quarrel. The court also found that the appellant had no pre-meditation and that he did not take undue advantage of the situation.

Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 302 IPC and convicted the appellant under Section 304 Part-I IPC. The court sentenced the appellant to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and directed him to pay compensation of ₹ 10,000 to the victim's father.

JUDGMENT

K.C. Bhanu, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "Cr.P.C."), is directed against the judgment, dated 05.10.2007, in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, whereunder and whereby, appellant herein/A-1 was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "I.P.C.") and accordingly, he is convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present appeal may be delineated as follows:

About 31/2 years prior to the incident, marriage of one Yashoda @ Latha (hereinafter referred to, as "the deceased") was performed with A-1 and after the marriage, the couple lived happily for six months and thereafter, A-1 to A-3 started harassing the deceased on petty matters. On 30.10.2005, A-1 made a phone call to P.W. 1 and informed him that he was intending to commit suicide and asked him to come to his house. Immediately, P.W. 1 rushed to the house of A-1 at Nizamabad and on enquiry, came to know that his daughter was taken to Venkateshwara Hospital, and then, he went to the said hospital and enquired his daughter who informed him that on that day, A-1 poured kerosene on her and set her fire with a towel by lifting it with a match stick due to which she sustained burn injuries, thereby, he came to know that since the date of marriage, A-1 started harassing the deceased with an intention to kill her and thereby, poured kerosene and set her fire. On the same day, at 8.00 p.m., he lodged a complaint to police on which P.W. 11-the Sub Inspector of Police registered a case in Crime No. 142 of 2005 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 I.P.C. and issued First Information Report (for short, "F.I.R."). Thereafter, he examined and recorded the statement of the complainant and visited Venkateshwara Hospital and there, he examined the deceased and gave a requisition to the Medical Officer for treatment. Thereafter, he visited the scene of occurrence, examined P.W. 6, recorded his detailed statement and secured the presence of P.Ws. 5 and 7 and conducted scene of occurrence panchanama and prepared rough sketch of the scene. He seized a kerosene tin and a match box under a cover of panchanama before the same mediators. On requisition, P.W. 14 recorded the dying declaration of the deceased. On 31.102005, at 10.00 a.m. A-1 surrendered in the police station and accordingly, P.W. 11 effected his arrest, produced him before the Court and got remanded to judicial custody. On 26.11.2005, at 9.00 a.m., P.W. 11 received information from the hospital that the deceased, while undergoing treatment at Government Hospital, Nizamabad, succumbed to the injuries and P.W. 12, by filing the memo, got altered the section of law from 498-A and 307 I.P.C. to 498-A and 302 I.P.C. He filed a requisition before P.W. 9-Mandal Revenue Officer, Nizamabad to conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased and accordingly, he conducted inquest in the presence of P.W. 8 and two others and thereafter, the dead body was subjected to post mortem examination at the hospital. During the course of inquest, P.W. 12 examined the complainant and other witnesses i.e., P.Ws. 1 to 4 and 6 and recorded their statements. On 24.12.2005, on reliable information, P.W. 11 apprehended A-2 and A-3 and produced them before P.W. 13-Circle Inspector of Police, who interrogated them, and they confessed to have committed the offence in this case along with A-1 and accordingly, he effected their arrest and produced them before the Court and got remanded to judicial custody. Thus, the evidence collected well established that A-1 to A-3 harassed the deceased on petty matters and ultimately, on 30.10.20

























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top