Back
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, SANJAY KUMAR JAISWAL
Manoj Kumhar, S/o Shri Siyalal – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of CrPC has been preferred by the appellant herein against the judgment and order dated 30.12.2016 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Manendragarh, District Korea in Sessions Case No.23/2014, by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.2000/- and in the event of non-payment of fine amount, to suffer additional Simple Imprisonment for 3 months.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.12.2013 at about 1:30 p.m. at his house, the appellant lightened matchstick on the body of his wife Jyoti by which she suffered 70% of burn injuries and later she died on 21.12.2013 during the course of her treatment in the Community Health Centre, Manendragarh. At the hospital, her dying declaration was recorded vide Exhibit P-15 by the Executive Magistrate, PW-18 Amit Kumar Gupta after PW-13 Dr. D.K. Singh certified that the deceased was in a fit mental and physical state to give her dying declaration and which implicated the appellant for the burn injuries caused to his wife Jyoti resulting in her d
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC, considering the absence of premeditation and the sudden outburst leading to the death, leadin....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC, leading to the alteration of the appellants' conviction and their release from jail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal principles from relevant cases to determine the nature of the offence and the appropriate conviction and sentencing for th....
The court established that sudden provocation and lack of premeditation can allow conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The absence of pre-planning or premeditation in a criminal act can influence the categorization of the offence under the Indian Penal Code.
The court held that the appellant's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC due to lack of premeditation and presence of heat of passion.
The court clarified that actions under intoxication leading to death may constitute culpable homicide not amounting to murder, not murder itself.
Unintentional homicide will not come under Section 302 of IPC.
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
