SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Raj) 1482

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Sabina and Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ.
Sitaram - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 375 of 2016, 404 of 2016
Decided On : 28-08-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Rajesh Sharma, Advocate, Rajendra Singh Tanwar, Advocate, P.K. Sharma, Advocate, Manish Sharma, Advocate, Javed Choudhary, Advocate, Ashvin Garg, Advocate, Ajay Singh Tanwar, Advocate

Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner (Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC).

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - SUDDEN FIGHT - HEAT OF PASSION - NO PREMEDITATION - CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER - SECTION 304 PART-I IPC - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted and sentenced for murder (Section 302 IPC), rioting (Section 148 IPC), and other offenses. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with others, had formed an unlawful assembly and attacked the complainant party, resulting in the death of one person and injuries to several others. The appellants claimed that the incident was a sudden fight that occurred in the heat of passion, without premeditation or intent to kill.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the incident was indeed a sudden fight that occurred in the heat of passion, without premeditation or intent to kill. The court relied on the testimony of witnesses who stated that the occurrence had taken place all of a sudden and that there was no pre-meditation between the parties to commit the offense.

Issues: 1. Whether the incident was a sudden fight that occurred in the heat of passion, without premeditation or intent to kill. 2. Whether the appellants were guilty of murder (Section 302 IPC) or culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part-I IPC).

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellants were guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part-I IPC) and acquitted them of the charge of murder (Section 302 IPC). The court relied on Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, which provides that culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.

Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants of the charge of murder (Section 302 IPC) and convicted them of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part-I IPC). The appellants were sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000 each. The court also acquitted the appellants of various other charges, including rioting (Section 148 IPC).

JUDGMENT

1. Vide this order, above mentioned two appeals would be disposed of.

2. The appellants have filed the above mentioned appeals challenging the judgment/order dated 21.3.2016 passed by the trial court whereby they were convicted and sentenced as under:-

Appellants - Babulal and Pooran Mal

 U/s. 302 IPC

Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default thereof to undergo six months additional simple imprisonment.

U/s. 325/149 IPC

Two years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

 U/s. 323/149 IPC

Three months imprisonment.

 U/s. 341/149 IPC

One month imprisonment.

 U/s. 148 IPC

One year imprisonment.

U/s. 354 IPC

Three years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- each and in default thereof to undergo three months additional simple imprisonment..

Appellant - Jeevan

U/s. 302 IPC

Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo six months additional simple imprisonment.

U/s. 325/149 IPC

Two years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

U/s. 323/149 IPC

Three months imprisonment.

U/s. 341/149 IPC

One month imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC

One year imprisonment.

Appellant - Mukesh

U/s. 302/149 IPC

 Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo six months additional simple imprisonment.

U/s. 325/149 IPC

Two years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

 U/s. 323/149 IPC

Three months imprisonment.

U/s. 341/149 IPC

One month imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC

One year imprisonment.

 U/s. 354 IPC

 Three years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default thereof to undergo three months additional simple imprisonment.

Appellants - Durga Ram, Sitaram s/o Jagannath, Ram Chandra, Sitaram s/o Prahlad, Rohitash, Hanuman, Memaram @ Gopal, Mohanlal, Hari Ram, Prakash, Kaluram, Hemraj

U/s. 302/149 IPC

Life imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default thereof to undergo six months additional simple imprisonment.

U/s. 325/149 IPC

Two years imprisonment, to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

U/s. 323/149 IPC

Three months imprisonment.

U/s. 341/149 IPC

One month imprisonment.

U/s. 148 IPC

One year imprisonment.

3. Prosecution case was set into motion on the basis of the report (Ex.P.6) lodged by the complainant Ramesh Chandra (PW.2). On the basis of report lodged by the complainant, formal FIR (Ex.P.7) bearing No.86 dated 26.5.2012 was registered at Police Station Virat Nagar, District Jaipur Rural under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 302/354 IPC.

4. Prosecution story as per the FIR, in brief, was that on 25.5.2012 Mamta, niece of the complainant, had gone to answer the call of nature in nearby fields at about 5.00 AM. Pooran Mal alongwith others took away Mamta in a Jeep/Car on finding her alone. The said persons outraged the modesty of Mamta and told her that in case she would narrate the incident to her family members then she and her family members would be done to death. Some passersby informed their family members on seeing Mamta. The said persons used to harass Mamta while going to school. On 25.5.2012 at about 5.30/6.30 PM, Ramesh Chandra and his brother Kajod Mal, Maliram, Arjun were doing construction work of temple near Bus Stand and when they complained to Hanuman Jatav and Kishan @ Bagaram Jat and Nathu, relatives of Pooran Mal, then said persons told the complainant and his broth

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top