Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J
Sri Bhim Kanta Dutta S/o- Sri Dharma Kanta Dutta - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Assam - Respondent
Crl.A. 86 / 2011
Decided On : 03-03-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304 (Part-II) - Culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Conviction under Section 304 (Part-II) set aside due to lack of evidence establishing culpable homicide; post-mortem report indicated death from cardiac arrest without external or internal injuries. (Paras 25 , 26 , 28 )
(B) Evidence - Primacy of medical evidence - Medical evidence ruling out injuries claimed by witnesses led to adverse inference against the prosecution's case. (Paras 24 )
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for causing the death of the informant's husband following a quarrel over firewood. The deceased died hours later, and the post-mortem revealed no injuries. (Paras 3 , 25 )
Findings of Court:
The court found the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was unsustainable in law. (Paras 27 , 28 )
Issues: Whether the appellants' actions constituted culpable homicide under Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC. (Para 21 )
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of proving the basic ingredients of culpable homicide; absence of injuries and evidence of heart disease undermined the prosecution's case. (Paras 25 , 26 )
Result: Conviction set aside; appellants acquitted.
J UDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
Heard Mr. S. Dey, learned Counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. P. S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. This appeal is being presented against the judgment & order dated 14.03.2011 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Sivasagar, in Sessions Case No. 34(S-C)/2009, whereby the appellants/accused persons were convicted under Section 304 (Part-II), read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”).
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 29.07.2007 at about 5 p.m. the appellants/accused persons i.e. Bhimkanta Dutta and Pradip Changmai came to the house of the informant and quarreled with her husband for firewood and gave fist and blows on his person, for which he sustained injuries and succumbed to death. Accordingly, the informant lodged an FIR on 30.07.2007 being Sonari P.S. Case No. 155/2007, registered under Section 302/34 of the IPC.
4. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer (PW-14) investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet against the appellants/accused persons under Section 302/34 of IPC.
5. The matter being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sonari committed the case records under Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C”) before the Sessions Judge. Accordingly, the learned trial Court framed charge under Section 302 of IPC, read with Section 34 of IPC against the appellants/accused persons and held the trial.
6. During trial the prosecution adduced the evidence of 14 prosecution witnesses along with 14 nos. of exhibits. The list of prosecution witnesses and the list of prosecution exhibits are extracted hereunder for ready reference: -
“List of Prosectuion Witnesses:
1. P.W.1 --- Smti Shanti Ruhi Das.
2. P.W.2 --- Sri Anil Bhumiz.
3. P.W.3 --- Sri Sadhu Digar.
4. P.W.4 --- Sri Bharat Newar.
5. P.W.5 --- Sri Gopal Gowala.
6. P.W.6 --- Sri Lohit Kr. Saikia, J.M.
7. P.W.7 --- Sri. Rajo Ruhi Das.
8. P.W.8 --- Smti Rukmini Ruhi Das.
9. P.W.9 --- Sri Nimai Bauri.
10. P.W.10 --- Sri Kuleswar Kurmi.
11. P.W.11 --- Sri Dharma Kanta Dutta.
12. P.W.12 --- Sri Pradip Dutta.
13. P.W.13 --- Dr. Biswajeet Dutta.
14. P.W.14 --- Sri Suren Bailung, I.O.
List of Prosecution Exhibits:
1. Ext.1 --- Seizure list.
2. Ext.2 --- Statement of witness Gopal Gowala recorded U/S 164, Cr.P.C.
3. Ext.3 --- Statement of witness Smti Shanti Ruhi Das recorded U/S 164, Cr.P.C.
4. Ext.4 --- Statement of witness Sri Anil Bhumiz recorded U/S 164,Cr.P.C.
5. Ext.5 --- Statement of witness Sri Sadhu Digar recorded U/S 164,Cr.P.C.
6. Ext.6 --- Inquest report.
7. Ext.7 --- Post-Mortem Report.
8. Ext.8 --- Ejahar.
9. Ext.9 --- Sketch map.
10. Ext.10 --- Charge-Sheet.
11. Ext.11 --- Statement of Smti Rukmini Ruhi Das U/S 161, Cr.P.C.
12. Ext.12 --- Statement of Sri Nimai Bauri U/S 161, Cr.P.C.
13. Ext.13 --- Statement of Sri Dharmakanta Dutta.
14. Ext.14 --- Statement of Sri Pradip Dutta U/S 161, Cr.P.C.”
7. Upon the evidence of the prosecution being closed, incriminating circumstances were put to the appellants/accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., wherein the appellants/accused persons generally denied the allegations and adduced two defence witnesses being D.W.1- Sri Bolin Dutta and D.W.2 -Sri Rangila Newar.
8. Thereafter, upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court found the appellants/accused persons guilty under Section 304 (Part-II), read with Section 34 of IPC and accordingly, sentenced the appellants/accused persons to Rigorous Imprisonment for 5(five) years each and also to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each; in default to simple imprisonment for another 1(one) month each. Against the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been filed.
9. Mr. S. Dey, learned Counsel for the appellants/accused persons submits that the conviction under Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC is unsustainable in law as much as it is cle
Conviction under Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC cannot stand without proof of culpable homicide, particularly when medical evidence contradicts witness testimonies.
Culpable homicide not amounting to murder established when the accused acted with knowledge that her actions could result in death, despite lacking intent to kill.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC in cases of sudden fights and the absence of premeditation, leading to a conviction under Section....
Conviction upheld under Section 304 Part-II IPC based on credible eyewitness testimony despite minor contradictions; intention to murder not established.
The court ruled that the incident was a sudden fight, reducing the conviction of appellant No.1 from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 part-II of IPC.
Murder and attempt to murder – In a case of free fight between parties where both parties have sustained injuries, benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can be extended.
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
