IMPORTANT POINT
Culpable homicide can be reduced from murder to a lesser charge if the act was committed under grave and sudden provocation, as outlined in Section 300 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

Michael Zothankhuma, J

Heard Mr. Lalremtluanga, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the impugned Judgment and Order dated 11.11.2022 and Sentence Order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Addl. District & Session Judge-I, Aizawl in SC No. 27 of 2019, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellant was to suffer imprisonment for a further period of 3 months.

3. The facts of the case in brief is that an FIR dated 01.07.2018 was submitted by the informant (PW-1) to the Officer in Charge, Marpara Police Station, stating that on 01.07.2018 at around 2:30 pm, his father Sh. Sneha Ranjan Chakma was killed by the appellant with a machete while he was attending a Village Level Implementing Committee Meeting, in the residence of the Village Council Secretary of Silsury West, Sh. Krishna Kanti Chakma (PW-8). Consequent to the FIR being filed, a case under the Marpara Police Station was registered, bearing Marpara PS Case No. 2/2018 dated 02.07.2018 under Section 302 IPC r/w Section 27 of the Arms Act.

4. After completion of investigation by the Inquiry Officer (I.O), chargesheet was filed, wherein a prima facie case under Section 302 IPC was found against the appellant for having killed the father of the informant.

5. The learned Trial Court framed charge under Section 302 IPC on 23.05.2019, in which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, 17 prosecution witnesses and 1 defence witness were examined by the Trial Court. The examination of the appellant under Section 313 CrPC was done on 30.03.2020. The learned Trial Court having coming to a finding that the appellant had murdered the deceased, the impugned Judgment and Order convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302 IPC was issued by the learned Trial Court on 11.11.2022.

6. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the appellant has made a challenge to the impugned Judgment and Order in this appeal.

7. The basic ground of challenge by the appellant to his conviction and sentence, is that the death of the deceased had occurred due to a sudden quarrel that had taken place between the appellant and the deceased. As death had occurred due to a grave and sudden provocation, the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC was not sustainable and the appellant should have been convicted under Section 304 Part-II IPC. The appellant’s counsel accordingly submits that the conviction and sentence of the appellant should be altered to Section 304 Part-II IPC. In this regard, he relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Nawaz Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police,reported in(2019) 3 SCC 517.

8. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram submits that the appellant had gone to the place of occurrence, i.e. the residence of PW-8, where a Meeting of the Village Level Implementing Committee was being held. The appellant, who was not a member of the Committee had brought a dao into the residence of PW-8 and had subsequently struck the deceased with the dao which led to his death. The appellant thereafter ran away from the place of occurrence and surrendered before the police. The learned PP further submits that the appellant made a confession under Section 164 CrPC before a Judicial Magistrate, admitting the fact that he had killed the deceased.

9. The learned PP also submits that as there were several eye witnesses to the act of the appellant hitting the deceased with a dao and as the deceased had died due to the injury caused by the dao, the fact that the appellant had killed the deceased was not in dispute. The learned PP also submits that the evidence nowhere shows that there was any grave and sudden provocation on the part of the deceased,