Back
MANISH CHOUDHURY, ROBIN PHUKAN
Buwaj Horo – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manish Choudhury, J.
1. The instant criminal appeal from Jail is preferred against a Judgment dated 17.07.2019 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case no. 165/2014. By the Judgment and Order dated 17.07.2019, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur has convicted the accused-appellant for the offence of murder under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and as a consequence, the accused- appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for another three months. In addition, the accused-appellant has also been convicted on finding him guilty for the offence under Section 448, IPC and for the said offence, he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment are ordered to run concurrently.
2. We have heard Mr. M. Dutta, learned Amicus Curiae for the accused- appellant; and Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel & Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam assisted by Ms. R. Das, learned counsel for the respondent State of Assam.
3. The ca
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....
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 affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, highlighting that the accused acted with sufficient intent, despite claims of provocation, based on consistent eyewitness testimoni....
The court affirmed the conviction for murder, establishing that a single fatal blow with a weapon can constitute murder if intended to cause serious injury, rejecting claims of provocation.
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.
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.
(1) Ordinarily, a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately sequence of events which take place in rapid succession or in a short time span – Presence of an injured eye-witness at the time and ....
The Court upheld the life imprisonment conviction under Section 302 IPC, affirming the case as murder due to the absence of sudden provocation and corroborative evidence supporting the eyewitness's t....
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
