Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
ILESH J. VORA, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Bhalabhai Pratapbhai Parmar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. incident leading to appeal (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 2. state's appeal arguments (Para 11) |
| 3. defense's counterarguments (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's review of evidence (Para 15) |
| 5. court's reasoning on culpable homicide (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. appeal outcome (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
ILESH J. VORA, J.
1. Here is the appeal by the State against judgment and order of acquittal.
2. The respondent accused nos.2 to 4 have been acquitted from all the charges whereas respondent no.1 was convicted and sentenced under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC, and acquitted for the charge of murder.
3. Thus, by this appeal, the State has come up before this Court challenging the judgment of acquittal under Section 302 of the IPC.
4. Vide judgment and order of sentence dated 30.05.2014 passed in Sessions Case No.63 of 2012, the Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad convicted and sentenced the respondent accused Bhalabhai Pratapbhai Parmar for the offences punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and acquitted the respondent accused nos.2 to 4 from all the charges.
5. Facts in brief leading to file this appeal are as u
The court upheld the conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II, emphasizing the absence of intent to kill and the act being committed in the heat of passion.
The court upheld the conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304, Part I, emphasizing the absence of intent to kill and the nature of the incident as a sudden fight.
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.
Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the injury, the presence of a motive prior to the incident, and the absence of provocation are crucial factors in determining th....
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 clarified the distinction between murder and culpable homicide, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident.
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
