Back
ILESH J. VORA, S. V. PINTO
IMRAIL @ RANU ISARKHAN PATHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 03.11.2018 passed by the learned 6th Additional (Adhoc) Sessions Judge, Panchmahals @ Godhra (hereinafter referred to as the “learned Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 36 of 2017. The appellants were put on trial for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 324, 326, 302 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment (simple imprisonment) and fine of Rs. 5000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) and in default, simple imprisonment for ten days for the offence under Section 302 and 114 of the IPC and to simple imprisonment for three years for the offence under Sections 324, 326, 114 of the IPC. The learned Trial Court was pleased to give benefit of doubt to both the appellants for the offences under Sections 504 and 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and further ordered both the sentences to run concurrently and the period of detention of the appellants was to be given as a set off against the sentence.
The appellants are refer
The court found that the appellants' actions during a sudden quarrel constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder, justifying a conviction under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
The court ruled that a sudden quarrel without premeditation led to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, rather than murder under Section 302 IPC.
Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the accused's intention, with sudden provocation potentially reducing the charge from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murde....
The court modified convictions from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the need for established common intention among accused, reflecting principles of reasonable doubt....
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 distinguished between murder and culpable homicide, concluding that the appellant's actions fell under Section 304 Part-I due to lack of intent and premeditation.
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.
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
