Back
A. S. SUPEHIA, VIMAL K. VYAS
Chandubhai @ Dharmendrabhai Raijibhai Tadvi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vimal K. Vyas, J.
1. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 12th December 2023, the present appeal is taken up for final hearing.
2. This Court, while passing the aforesaid order, has considered the fact that the appellant-accused has already undergone more than 12 years of incarceration.
3. The present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘CrPC’), is at the instance of the appellant-accused and is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 8th April 2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Narmada at Rajpipla in Sessions Case No.11 of 2011, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant-accused for the offences under Section 302 of the IPC (for short, ‘IPC’) read with Section 135 of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT .
4. By the aforesaid judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge found the appellant-accused guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, and consequently, sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000=00 and in default of payment of fine, the appellant-accused was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The l
The court ruled that intentional acts resulting in death with premeditated aggression qualify as murder, not lesser culpable homicide, emphasizing the necessity of clear evidence in establishing inte....
The court affirmed that evidence must establish intention to commit murder, ruling that provocation claimed by the accused did not mitigate the crime, reaffirming conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, which outlines situations where culpable homicide does not amount to murder, based on the abs....
Exception 4 can be invoked if death is caused (a) without premeditation, (b) in a sudden fight, (c) without offenders having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner, and (d) fight....
The court established that a homicide committed in a sudden fight without premeditation and without taking undue advantage can be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Excepti....
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 act of the appellant was deemed culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of premeditation and the nature of the quarrel, qualifying for Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
The court established that the presence of intention to kill, the nature of the weapon used, and the circumstances of the quarrel are critical in determining whether an act constitutes murder or a le....
(1) Ordinarily, a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately sequence of events which take place in rapid succession or in a short time span – Presence of an injured eye-witness at the time and ....
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
