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 intent in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Medhi, J.

The instant appeal has been preferred from jail against a judgment & order dated 28.01.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karbi Anglong, Diphu in connection with Sessions Case No.26/2017 (New) arising out of GR Case No. 191/2015 convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.

2. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar on 06.03.2015 by the PW3 stating inter alia that on 05.03.2015 at about 7:30 pm, the appellant had grievously injured Shri Sursingh Gaur @ Bankot Gaur, who was his father-in-law by assaulting him on the head with a lathi made of stump of bamboo whereafter, the deceased was brought to Dokmoka Primary Health Centre, where he succumbed to his injuries. Based on the Ejahar, the FIR was registered as Dokmoka PS Case No.17/2025 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was submitted whereafter, the charges were framed. On denial of the same, the trial had begun in which the prosecution had adduced evidence through 11 nos. of witnesses including the doctor and the IO.

4. PW1 is a neighbor who had stated that the fateful day was the day of Holi festival, when he had heard a hue and cry and had arrived in the front of the house of the deceased and could learn that the accused had assaulted the deceased. Thereafter, a 108 ambulance had come and the deceased was taken to the hospital and on the next date, he could learn that the deceased had succumbed to his injuries.

5. PW2 is the daughter of the deceased and also the wife of the accused. She deposed that there was a scuffle between the accused and deceased, following a quarrel and in the same, the head of the deceased got hit against a betel nut tree causing injury on his head and he became unconscious and fell on the ground. She had accordingly raised a hue and cry whereafter, the villagers had come and took her father to the hospital in 108 ambulance. Her father had passed away on the same night. In the cross examination, she had stated that both the deceased and the accused were in an inebriated stage and the deceased was so inebriated that he could not even stand.

6. PW3 is the informant who is also the brother of the deceased. He had stated that his house is situated near the house of the deceased and after finishing his meal in the evening, he could see the appellant hitting on the wall of his house with a big lathi and accordingly, he had asked the appellant not to do so, as the same would cause damage. Thereafter, he had left his house and started hitting the wall of the house of the deceased, when the appellant was tried to be resisted by the PW3, he was pushed down when the deceased had come out of the house and at that time, the appellant had dealt a blow on his head with lathi, which was in the hand. The deceased had fallen down on the ground instantly and his head got cracked and blood started oozing out. He had accordingly called the VDP member who had come and the police was informe