Classification of homicide as murder requires a specific intention to cause death. When a fatal injury is inflicted during a spontaneous quarrel, lacking premeditation and motive, it is more appropriately punishable as culpable homicide not amounting to murder (knowledge-based) rather than as murder (intention-based).

JUDGMENT :

MADHU JAIN, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 415 (2) read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter, ‘BNSS’) assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 30th September, 2024 and 04th January, 2025 respectively passed by the court of Ld. ASJ. West District Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, whereby the Appellant has been convicted in Sessions Case No. 339/2020, arising out of FIR No. 75/2020 registered at Police Station Mundka, Delhi, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’).

2. By the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the Appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC along with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-. In default of payment of the said fine, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months. The Ld. Trial Court further directed that out of the fine amount, Rs. 9,000/- be paid to the prosecution towards trial expenses, and Rs. 41,000/- be paid as compensation to the family/LRs of the deceased, with a further recommendation to the DLSA, West District for additional compensation.

BRIEF FACTS:

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 29th February 2020 at approximately 11:30 AM, at Plot Khasra No. 37/19, near Shani Mandir, Bakkarwala, Baprola Road, VPO Bakkarwala, Delhi, the Appellant/Accused Sanjay Singh, allegedly caused death of one Amit (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) by repeatedly striking his head and other body parts with a brick, and also allegedly attempted to strangulate the deceased. The prosecution case proceeds on the allegation that the deceased Amit and the Appellant/Accused were acquainted with each other and used to consume liquor together.

4. It is not in dispute that the Appellant and the deceased were close friends and were in the habit of consuming liquor together. On 29th February 2020 at about 8:00 AM, the Appellant came to the house of the deceased and took him along to his tenanted room at Bakkarwala for the purpose of consuming liquor together.

5. According to the prosecution's case, the genesis of the fatal incident lay in a trivial altercation between the Appellant and the deceased over the payment for the liquor that had been purchased by them. When the Appellant asked the deceased to pay his share of the amount for the liquor, the deceased refused, leading to an altercation. During the course of this altercation, the deceased is stated to have slapped the Appellant, whereupon the Appellant, in a fit of rage, picked up a brick from outside the room and repeatedly struck the deceased on the head with it, causing fatal injuries. Both the Appellant and the deceased were in a state of intoxication at the relevant time.

6. The genesis of the prosecution case lies in the complaint lodged by Sh. Jai Bhagwan (PW-4), who is stated to be the landlord of the Appellant in respect of the tenanted room situated at the aforesaid plot. It is the case of the prosecution that on 29th February 2020 at about 12:00 noon, the Appellant came to the residence of PW-4 in a perplexed condition and made an extra-judicial confession before PW-4 and his father, Sh. Laxman Singh, that he had killed someone during a quarrel at the said plot. PW-4 accompanied Appellant to the te