Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, D.M.VYAS
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Chetankumar Kantilal Mevada – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 04/02/2014 rendered in Sessions Case No.69 of 2012 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur whereby the respondent who is the sole accused in the said case was acquitted of the charges under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short ‘the IPC’).
2. Originally the accused was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 323 and 337 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE but he was found guilty only for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 337 of the IPC and he was convicted for the said two offences and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprison for a period of one month and he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 337 of the IPC and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. However, he was acquitted for the charge under Section 302
Culpable homicide is not murder if committed in a fit of passion during a sudden quarrel, as determined by Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.
Fatal blow inflicted on head of victim with great force will constitute offence of murder.
Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
The court held that when a death occurs from a single blow in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, it may be classified under Section 304 IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The court clarified the distinction between murder and culpable homicide, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident.
The court ruled that a sudden quarrel without premeditation led to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, rather than murder under Section 302 IPC.
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.
The appellate court modified the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 IPC, recognizing the absence of premeditation and intention to kill during a sudden altercation influenced by the accused's....
The court distinguished between murder and culpable homicide, concluding that the appellant's actions fell under Section 304 Part-I due to lack of intent and premeditation.
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
