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.

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 ‘CrPC”), the appellant - original convict has challenged the judgment and order dated 31.10.2012 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Banaskantha-Palanpur in Sessions Case No.79 of 2011, 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 rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days.

2. The Appeal came to be admitted on 7.5.2013. 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 :

3.1 That the complainant-Prakashbhai Punambhai Patani was engaged in the business of vending fruits on chhapi highway road near pick-up stand. On 31.8.2011, at about 8.00 a.m., the complainant had come to his place of business and his brother Mahesh had also come on the chhapi highway, near petrol pump for labour work. In the evening at about 7.00 p.m., the deceased Maheshbhai had eaten a banana from the lorry of the complainant and thereafter, he had informed the complainant that he is going home. It is further the case of the prosecution that after the brother of the complainant had left for homw, at some distance, accused Mukesh Patani started having verbal altercation with deceased Mahesh and therefore the complainant had gone there and heard that the accused-Mukesh was asking the deceased-Mahesh to return back Rs.200/- which he had given to him. The deceased informed the brother of the complainant Mukesh that he was not having money with him and he would return the said amount within two days. On this, the accused got provoked and he started abusing the deceased and thereafter he, in the heat of passion, gave a blow on the chest of the deceased with 'Khilasari' type of weapon due to which the brother of the complainant started shouting and therefore the accused escaped from the place of offence. The complainant and others took the deceased to the civil hospital at Siddhpur, from where the deceased was referred to hospital at Mehsana and on the way to Mehsana, the brother of the complainant died and therefore his dead body was brought at Civil Hospital, Siddhpur. The FIR was lodged with Chhapi police station, which was registered as C.R.No.I-71 of 2011.

3.2 The investigating officer, after completion of the investigation, had filed the chargesheet before the competent court. As the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the same was committed to the Sessions Court.

3.3 The charge came to be framed against the present appellant for the offences punishable underSections 302, 504 of IPC and Section 135 of the B.P.Act at Exh.6. The charge framed against the appellant was denied by the appellant and he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3.4 In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined many witnesses and produced several documentary evidences on record, which are mentioned in paragraph no.5 as under: