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

2021 Supreme(Raj) 682

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Sandeep Mehta,Manoj Kumar Garg, JJ.
Pokar Ram - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 2020
Decided on : 27-07-2021

Advocates appeared:
Kalu Ram Bhati, Advocate, N.S. Bhati, Advocate

The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of intention and premeditation in categorizing the offence under the Indian Penal Code.

Headnote:

Criminal Appeal - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - [Motive, Intention, Conviction] - [Section 302, Section 304 Part II IPC] - The court discussed the evidence and arguments presented by both the appellant and the public prosecutor. It analyzed the nature of the injuries, the circumstances of the incident, and the absence of premeditation to commit murder. The court referred to Section 300 and Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, and cited legal provisions and case laws to establish that the accused had no intention to kill the deceased. The court altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC based on the lack of intention to cause death.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC for causing the death of his brother. The prosecution's case was based on witness statements and recovery of blood-stained clothes and a lathi. The appellant argued that there was no evidence of motive or intention to kill the deceased.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant had no intention to cause death and altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC based on the circumstances of the incident and the nature of the injuries.

Issues: The key issues were the presence of motive and intention to kill the deceased, which influenced the categorization of the offence under the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the absence of premeditation, the nature of the injuries, and the circumstances of the incident to determine the lack of intention to cause death, leading to the alteration of the conviction.

Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, altering the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC and sentencing the appellant accordingly.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - The instant criminal appeal has been filed by the accused appellant under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 19.11.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali, District Pali in Session Case No. 23/2016 by which learned Judge convicted the accused-appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment and also imposed a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo a sentence of six month s simple imprisonment.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a written report was filed by one Darga Ram before the Police Station, Rani, District Pali stating therein that his brothers viz. Pokar Ram and Hasta Ram both reside in a nearby Dhani and they used to often quarrel with each other for liquor. The day before, Hasta Ram came on a motorcycle after consuming liquor and in the night, Pokar Ram inflicted lathi blows on the head and body of Hasta Ram who succumbed to the injuries. The informant came to know about the incident only on next morning. When he reached the house of Hasta Ram, he was lying with only an underwear on his body.

3. On the basis of the said report, the Police registered the FIR for offences under Sections 302, 201 IPC and started investigation. After usual investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused-appellant for offence punishable under Sections 302 & 201 IPC.

4. The case was committed for trial before the court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Bali, Distt. Pali where the charges were framed against the accused-appellant. The accused-appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. At the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses in all. Thereafter the statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. No witness was examined on the defence side.

6. At conclusion of the trial, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bali, Distt. Pali vide judgment dated 19.11.2019 convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and passed sentence mentioned above.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned trial court has not appreciated the evidence led by the prosecution in proper perspective. It is argued that there is no evidence on record that the appellant/accused had any motive or intention to kill the deceased. They used to quarrel for liquor every other day and on the day of incident also, some hot discussion took place in between appellant and deceased and at the spur of moment, the injuries were caused to the deceased. According to the statement of PW/11 Dr. Ramesh Chandra, the injury on head of deceased was found to be simple in nature. There was fracture of ribs and cause of death was due to rupture of spleen. It is further argued that after arrest of appellant, his Banyan, Dhoti and lathi was recovered. On all these articles, human blood was found but the blood group comparison failed, therefore, it can be said that finding of learned trial court for convicting the accused appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC is not sustainable in law. The crux of argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that prosecution has failed to prove its case for offence under Section 302 IPC and offence cannot travel beyond offence under Section 304 Part II IPC because there is no evidence of motive/ intention on record so as to hold the accused appellant guilty for offence under Section 302 IPC. Learned counsel prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed in part and conviction of accused appellant may be altered from offence under Section 302 IPC to 304 Part II IPC with suitable reduction in sentence.

8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that the learned trial court has convicted the accused appellant while considering statement of eye witnesses who have levelled specific allegations against the appellant. It is also argued that blood stained clothes and lathi was recovered as per information given by the accused who

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