Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SOURENDRA PANDEY
Suman Devi W/o Balmukund Tanti – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SOURENDRA PANDEY, J.
1. We have heard Mr. Ankit Katriar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction dated 03.11.2022 and the order of sentence dated 10.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Banka (Bihar) in connection with Sessions Trial No. 249 of 2021, arising out of Amarpur P.S. Case No. 598 of 2020.
3. By the impugned judgment, referred to above, the appellant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302 , 323 and 341 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short referred to as the ‘IPC’) and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer simple imprisonment of one week for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment of one month each for the offences under Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC.
Prosecution Case :
4. The prosecution case is based on the written application dated 02.10.2020 given by the informant (P.W. 2). In his written report, the informant has stated that on 02.10.2020 at around 14:00 hours, when he was worki
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder hinges on the offender's intention, with insufficient evidence of intent leading to a reduced sentence.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, highlighting that the accused acted with sufficient intent, despite claims of provocation, based on consistent eyewitness testimoni....
The intention or knowledge of the actor is a crucial factor in determining whether an act falls within the ambit of Section 300 IPC (murder) or Section 304 Part 1 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the offender's intention and knowledge of the likely fatal consequences of their actions.
The court reclassified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC due to lack of intent and motive.
The court held that the accused lacked intent to kill, resulting in conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC instead of murder under Section 302 IPC.
Point of Law : Deceased and Appellant were both inebriated and the quarrel between them was sudden and heated, it cannot be reasonably said that the Appellant has acted in an unusual manner.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the evidence of eyewitnesses, the injured witness, and the medical evidence played a crucial role in establishing the guilt of the accused bey....
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
