Back
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
Thankappan S/o Ikkiran – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
This appeal is preferred by the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in S.C.No. 19 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Pathanamthitta, challenging the finding of guilt, conviction, and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge. In the above case, the appellants, along with one Rajeev, were charged for having committed offences punishable under Sections 323, 201, 302 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.
Short Facts:
2. Peethambaran, the deceased in the instant case, is the husband of Valsala (PW2). The prosecution allegation is that on 12.06.2006, at 6:00 p.m., due to the enmity that the deceased refused to join the Kerala Democratic Party, accused Nos. 2 and 3 inflicted bodily injuries on Peethambaran with intent to murder him. Thereafter, the 1st accused stabbed Peethambaran on his neck with a budding knife leading to his death.
Registration of Crime and Investigation
3. One Brijendralal (PW1), a Law Student, appeared before the Sub-Inspector of Police, Adoor Police Station, and lodged Ext.P1 FI Statement at 8:00 p.m. on 12.06.2006, based on which Crime No. 386 of 2006 was regist
The court affirmed that the 1st accused's act of stabbing the deceased constituted murder, rejecting the applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC due to the absence of mutual combat.
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 court modified the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the lack of premeditation and the nature of the altercation.
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....
The accused committed murder with the use of deadly weapons and there was no sudden fight or quarrel as envisaged in Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.
The court established that intent to cause death can be inferred from the use of a lethal weapon on a vital part of the body, leading to a conviction for murder.
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 ruled that a sudden quarrel without premeditation led to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC, rather than murder under Section 302 IPC.
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
