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 :
1. Here is the appeal by the State against judgment and order of acquittal.
3. Thus, by this appeal, the State has come up before this Court challenging the judgment of acquittal under Section 302 of the IPC.
5. Facts in brief leading to file this appeal are as under:
5.2 Pursuant to the FIR, the investigation had been entrusted to PW:18 Dashrathsinh Chavda as well as PW:23 Vimal Gamit. During the investigation, the I.O. took visit the place of occurrence and drew the panchnama and collected the necessary samples for FSL purpose. He also recorded the statement of witnesses. He also arrested the accused involved in the offence, recovered the weapon cricket bat and stump allegedly used by the accused. The I.O. then obtained the treatment case papers as well as the postmorterm note and sent the seized articles for chemical analysis and after receiving the report thereof, chargeshe
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.
Fatal blow inflicted on head of victim with great force will constitute offence of murder.
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
