Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, CJ.
A - Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kartala, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1478 of 2022
Decided on : 18-03-2025
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 and Section 304 - Conviction for murder - Appellant convicted for murder of sister and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment - Court found that the act was committed in a heat of passion without premeditation, warranting a reduction of conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II - Conviction altered to six years imprisonment. (Paras 1, 39)
(B) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Applicability of provisions regarding juvenile offenders - The appellant, being a juvenile, could not be sentenced to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release, and the trial court erred in imposing a sentence under Section 302 IPC. (Paras 27, 36)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, a juvenile, killed his sister in a fit of anger after being scolded. The incident occurred at home after dinner, and the appellant used the blunt side of an axe. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of family members, who later turned hostile. (Paras 3, 19)
Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the finding of homicidal death but found the conviction under Section 302 IPC inappropriate, converting it to Section 304 Part-II IPC. The appellant acted without premeditation and in a heat of passion. (Paras 36, 39)
Issues: Whether the appellant's actions constituted murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and whether the trial court's sentence was appropriate given the appellant's juvenile status. (Paras 18, 36)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's actions fell within Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, as there was no premeditation, and the act was committed in a heat of passion. The sentence was modified to reflect the nature of the crime and the appellant's age. (Paras 37, 39)
Result: Conviction altered to Section 304 Part-II IPC; sentenced to six years imprisonment.
Judgment :
(Ramesh Sinha, J.)
1. Challenge in this appeal, filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C) is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Juvenile Court (FTC) Korba, District Korba, in Sessions Trial No. 1/2021,whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs. 100/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.
2. Today, the matter is listed for hearing on IA No. 1, application under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.06.2019, after having dinner at 8:00 p.m., the complainant Mela Ram Kanwar (PW-1) was sleeping in the courtyard of his house with his wife Sukrita Bai (PW-2) and daughters Ranu Kanwar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) and Anasuiya Kanwar. At around 10:00 p.m., the appellant/child in conflict with the law (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant) who is the son of Mela Ram Kanwar (PW-1), returned home after roaming in the village and woke up the deceased, who is the sister of the appellant, and asked her to give him food. The deceased angrily scolded the appellant and gave her the food. After having the meals, the deceased scolded the appellant and gave her two slaps. On this, the appellant became so angry that he picked up the axe kept nearby and gave two blows on the head because of which the deceased fell on the ground and died. By this time, the complainant had woken up. The said incident was informed by the complainant to his wife and other neighbours. Since it was late at night and there was no means for travelling, the First Information Report was lodged on 12.06.2019. Crime was registered on the report and investigation was started.
4. During the investigation, the scene of the incident was inspected and a spot map was prepared, inquest was prepared and the body was sent for postmortem, statements of witnesses related to the incident were recorded and the appellant was arrested on 12.06.2019 after the crime was found to have been committed and he was sent to the Child Protection Home for proper custody after informing his family about the arrest. On the basis of the memorandum statement of the appellant, the axe used in the incident was seized in presence of witnesses. The axe used in the offence and the clothes worn by the deceased, blood stained and plain soil were also seized from the scene of the incident and were sent to FSL Bilaspur for examination. The investigation report of the Director State Forensic Science Laboratory was also obtained regarding the said seized property. After complete investigation, charge sheet bearing No. 75/19 was filed for the offence under Section 302 of IPC against the appellant under custody and presented before the Juvenile Justice Board, Korba. The said case was transferred to the court of Special Juvenile Court (FTC), Korba, for trial as it was a crime of heinous nature.
5. When the charge was framed against the appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, he denied the charges and prayed for trial.
6. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses namely Melaram Kanwar (PW-1), Smt. Sukrita Bai (PW-2), Kamal Singh Rathia (PW-6), Dayaram (PW-4), Antaram (PW-5), Santosh Kumar Sonwani, Assistant Teacher, (PW-3), Dayaram Kanwar (PW-4), Antram (PW-5), Kamal Singh Rathiya (PW-6), Barkha Meshram (PW-7), Dr. Shekhar Lal Kanwar (PW-8), Gajanand Yadav (PW-9) and Sunil Kumar Kurre (PW-10) and exhibited as many as 27 exhibits.
7. The statement of the appellant under section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded by the learned trial Court wherein he
The court ruled that the appellant's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC, as they were committed in a heat of passion without premeditation.
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 altered the conviction from murder under Section 302 to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part-II, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident as a sudden figh....
The court ruled 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 ruled that a sudden fight resulting in death, without premeditation or undue advantage, constitutes a conviction under Section 304 Part-II IPC instead of Section 302 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
