IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.J. DESAI, SANDEEP N. BHATT, JJ.
FIROZ @ ADIL HANIF JUNEJA SANDHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1252 of 2020
Decided On : 28-10-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 299, 300, 302, 304 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 374 – Murder – Offence of murder – Appeal came to be admitted – Registry has received Record and Proceedings along with paper-book which has been supplied to learned advocate for respective parties – Held, Court, therefore, held that it reveals that the incident has taken place in a sudden quarrel and in hit of moment, appellant lost his control and suddenly gave a knife blow to deceased on left part of chest – There is no evidence that there was any premeditation on part of accused – It cannot be said that it was premeditated crime and appellant has intention or motive to kill deceased – Apart from this aspect, deceased has pointed out that there was only one injury on chest, might be deep wound, but in court opinion, it cannot be said that appellant has taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner and therefore, court are of view that decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court relied upon by learned advocate for appellant are squarely applicable to facts of present case – Court are of opinion that case of appellant would fall under Explanation 4 of Section 300 of IPC and under these circumstances, sentence can be altered accordingly – Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.
1. By way of present Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) the appellant - original convict has challenged the judgment and order dated 17.06.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 87 of 2012, by which, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo six month’s simple imprisonment and also under Section 188 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo seven day’s simple imprisonment.
2. The Appeal came to be admitted on 11.12.2020. The Registry has received the Record and Proceedings along with the paper-book which has been supplied to the learned advocate for the respective parties.
3. The case put forward by the prosecution is as under:
3.2 Thereafter, investigation was carried out, Panchnama of the scene of offence was drawn and recovered the vehicle - Scooty. Thereafter, some surgery was carried out on the complainant, as advised by the medical persons. Thereafter, the complainant has expired during his treatment on 04.06.2021, accordingly, the police has added Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the present accused has caught by the officers of the Pradyumnanagar Police Station, Rajkot in connection with another offence and thereafter, the accused was arrested by way of transfer warrant by the Gandhigram Police Station and thereafter his motorbike bearing Registration No. GJ-10-BA-0186 is also recovered which the accused has sold to some automobile shop. Thereafter, the weapon used in the offence is recovered and blood sample of the accused is also taken and sent to the FSL for the further investigation and after receiving the report from the FSL and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet is filed under Sections 302, 504 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code before the competent Court, who, in turn, committed the case to the learned Sessions Court having jurisdiction to try the case on hand and the case was numbered as Sessions Case No. 87 of 2012.
3.3 The charge came
Bhagirath vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Garlapati Krishna vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Khokhan Vishwas vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Mangalsing and Others vs. State of Madhya Bharat
Munnawar and Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Nandlal vs. State of Maharashtra
The court ruled that the actions of the appellants amounted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, reducing their conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC due to lack of intent.
The court held that when a death occurs from a single blow in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, it may be classified under Section 304 IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on intention and circumstances, with the court applying Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC in cases of sudden quarrel.
The absence of intent to kill led to the reclassification of charges from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Point of law: Though the conviction is confirmed, the conviction deserves to be altered to Section 304 Part II of the IPC and the appellant deserves to be convicted for the offence punishable under S....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the provisions of Section 302 and Section 300 of the IPC, and the interpretation of Exception 4 under Section 300. The court'....
Fatal blow inflicted on head of victim with great force will constitute offence of murder.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.