Back
MUKTA GUPTA, ANISH DAYAL
Manoj – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anish Dayal, J.
1. This appeal assails the judgment dated 18th September, 2017 convicting the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and order on sentence dated 27th September, 2017 sentencing the appellant to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and simple imprisonment for three months in default of payment of fine.
The Incident:
2. As per the case of the prosecution an information was received on 17th July, 2012 that a person had fallen from the roof in Karkardooma Courts, Mediation Complex. When the police team arrived at the place of occurrence, a wall fan was found lying in broken condition and the roof of the Mediation Centre made up of plastic at the first floor was found damaged. The injured had already been taken to the hospital where he was declared brought dead. Upon the police checking the CCTV footage of second floor B Block, it was observed that the deceased was sitting on the parapet and some boys were found standing with the deceased and talking with each other and at about 10:13 a.m. one of the boys standing next to the deceased seemingly pushed him down. The crime team was called, Rukka was prepared and FIR No.256/2012 was registered
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal principles from Sarabjeet Singh v. State of U.P. and Girish Singh v. State of Uttaranchal to determine the appellant's cul....
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 essential ingredient of motive/intention under Section 302 IPC must be established to convict a person for the offence of murder.
Point of law : Motive plays an important role and becomes a compelling force to commit a crime and therefore motive behind the crime is a relevant factor for which evidence may be adduced.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 299 and 300 of IPC to determine the appellant's intention and knowledge regarding the likely consequence of the inflicte....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the accused's intention or knowledge regarding the fatal injury, with the absence of premeditation and the nature of the confrontation i....
Common intention is essentially a psychological fact and must be inferred from conduct and surrounding circumstances, but such inference must be based on credible material and not on conjecture or as....
The absence of intent to kill led to the reclassification of charges from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
The court held that while the appellant was guilty of culpable homicide, the lack of premeditation justified modification of the conviction from murder to a lesser offense under Section 304 Part II I....
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
