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 intent.

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 learned Sessions Judge also found the appellant-accused guilty of the offence under Section 135 of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT , and consequently, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs.2,000=00 and in default of payment of fine, the appellant-accused was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months.

THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION :

5. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Raijibhai Jingabhai Tadvi was a resident of village Gadkoi. He had two sons and the elder son was living separately from him with his family, whereas the younger son named Chandu alias Dharmendra Raijibhai is married and was residing with his family along with his parents. It is the case of the prosecution that the younger son of the deceased, namely, Chandu alias Dharmendra was not doing any work and was in the habit of consuming liquor. He used to sell out any household items to satisfy is habit of consuming liquor and he frequently used to quarrel with his father - deceased Raijibhai Jingabhai Tadvi. Under these circumstances, the present incident has happened.

6. It is the case of the prosecution that the present incident took place on 2.12.2010 at about 10:30 hours in the morning at village Gadkoi. At that time, the accused was in need of money to consume liquor and, therefore, while he was taking the maize lying in the house for sale, the deceased stopped him saying that the same is kept for the consumption of the family. So the accused became agitated and with the knowledge and intention to kill the deceased, he brought the Axe from the house and inflicted two blows on the vital parts of the body of the deceased, i.e. jaw and neck. The deceased fell down on the ground and was bleeding profusely from his internal organs, as a result, he died on the spot. When the accused was about to run away by throwing the Axe at the place of the incident, the people gathered around caught hold of him and informed the police.

7. On the strength of the complaint lodged by the wife of the decea