Back
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, MARLI VANKUNG
Lalruatzela – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Michael Zothankhuma, J.
Heard Mr. Lalrokunga Pautu, learned Amicus Curiae and Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.
2. This appeal has put to challenge the Judgment dated 05.12.2023 passed by the Court of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Aizawl in Sessions Case No. 75/2020, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default of fine Simple Imprisonment for 90 days.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR dated 24.05.2020 was submitted by the informant (PW-1), to the effect that he had received information that Lalthatluangi of Saitual Chawnpui Veng, had been assaulted by her husband in the residence of PW-9. On reaching the residence, he found the deceased Lalthatluangi lying on the floor with blood oozing from her injury. During inquiry, it was found that the victim had been assaulted by the appellant (husband), by stabbing her with a knife on her right arm and right thigh with intent to kill her. The appellant was apprehended while hiding inside his residence and the knife was also seized in the presence of PW-2 and PW-3. The victim succum
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 IPC, emphasizing the credibility of eyewitnesses and the premeditated nature of the appellant's actions.
The court established that provocation must be grave and sudden to negate intent for murder, which was not satisfied in this case.
Circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confession, when corroborated by testimony, can support a conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
The burden of proof in a criminal case lies on the prosecution, but in cases of circumstantial evidence, the burden on the accused to provide a cogent explanation is lighter. Motive and conduct are r....
It is settled law that retaliation has to be proportionate to provocation.
A conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC was adjusted to culpable homicide under Section 304 due to ambiguities in witness accounts and lack of intent, establishing a precedent for interpreting ....
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....
The court emphasized that the intensity of the attack and the proportionality of the response to alleged provocation are crucial in determining the applicability of provocation as a defense in murder....
Section 304 Part II IPC relates to punishment but without any intention to cause death.
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
