Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Jogen Munda – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of the trial and charges (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. evaluation of evidence and credibility of witnesses (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 22 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 4. distinction between murder and culpable homicide (Para 33 , 34 , 40) |
| 5. evaluating the factors of provocation in the homicide case. (Para 41) |
| 6. final judgment and orders issued (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
[Manish Choudhury, J.]
The present criminal appeal from Jail under Section 383 , Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC], 1973 [‘CrPC’ and/or ‘Code’] is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 23.02.2022 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur in Sessions Case no. 23 of 2018. In the trial of Sessions Case no. 23 of 2018, the accused-appellant faced a charge of patricide and after conclusion of the trial, the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur [‘the trial court’, for short] finding him guilty for the offence of murder under Section 300 , INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC], has sentenced him under Section 302 , IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in defa
The court ruled that the offence committed was culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to mutual provocation and a sudden fight, thus altering the conviction.
The court ruled that solitary eyewitness testimony can suffice for conviction in murder cases, especially when corroborated by medical evidence. The culpable act did not fall under provocation except....
Culpable homicide may be reduced to lesser charges under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC when death occurs due to injuries inflicted during a sudden fight without premeditation.
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to the absence of premeditation and the nature of the altercation, altering the conviction fr....
If intention of accused was limited to infliction of a bodily injury sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and did not extend to intention of causing death, offence would be murder.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide and murder under the Indian Penal Code, and the assessment of the accused's knowledge and intention in....
Conviction altered from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the act was done in the heat of passion without premeditation during a sudden quarrel.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on intention and circumstances, with the court applying Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC in cases of sudden quarrel.
Culpable homicide may be reduced to a lesser charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder if committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel without premeditation, as per Exception 4 ....
The appellants were convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the assault occurred without premeditation during a sudden quarrel, with shared common intention.
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
