IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI, JJ.
Punja S/o Ambawa Meena - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal (Db) No. 130 of 2018
Decided on : 13-03-2024
JUDGMENT : Punja - Criminal Appeal - Section 302 IPC - The court observed that the accused-appellant committed the crime, but the essential ingredient of motive/intention under Section 302 IPC was missing. The act of the accused-appellant did not meet out the essential ingredients of Section 302 IPC. The conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC was altered/converted into an offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC, and the sentence was reduced from life imprisonment to the sentence already undergone.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-appellant challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The case involved the death of the deceased due to injuries sustained in a fight with the accused-appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused-appellant committed the crime, but the essential ingredient of motive/intention under Section 302 IPC was missing. The conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC was altered/converted into an offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC, and the sentence was reduced from life imprisonment to the sentence already undergone.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused-appellant had the intention to cause the death of the deceased, as required under Section 302 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the essential ingredient of motive/intention under Section 302 IPC was missing, and the act of the accused-appellant did not meet out the essential ingredients of Section 302 IPC.
Final Decision: The conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC was altered/converted into an offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC, and the sentence was reduced from life imprisonment to the sentence already undergone.
JUDGMENT :
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
1. In the present appeal, through Jail, the accused-appellant laid a challenge to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.06.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur (‘Trial Court’) in Sessions Case No.40/2013 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Punja), whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as below:
| Offence | Sentence | Fine |
| 302 IPC | Life imprisonment | Rs.50,000/-, in default of which, to further undergo 5 months’ S.I. |
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 24.12.2012, one Hurji Meena (complainant) submitted a written information (Ex.P-4) before the then Station House Officer, Police Station Gordhanvilas, Udaipur, stating therein that on 22.12.2012 at around 7:00 a.m., one Babulal (son of complainant’s younger brother-Savji) aged about 30 years, at that time, alongwith accused-appellant (Punja) went to Marwad Forest to get some woods (Baans); whereafter, Babu Lal did not return back home. On 23.12.2012, the mother of Babu Lal enquired from Punja (accused-appellant) of the whereabouts of Babu Lal, to which she (mother) was told that after selling the woods (Baans), Babu Lal proceeded to Ahmedabad (Gujarat). Thereafter, upon the same enquiry being made by the complainant from Punja on 23.12.2012 itself at around 5:00 p.m., the complainant was told that on the relevant day, Babu Lal and Punja (accused-appellant) entered into a fight at Joonapaani Naala; Babu Lal is lying in the said Naala. Thereupon, the complainant alongwith other nearby persons reached the said Naala at about 06:00 p.m. on the same day i.e. 23.12.2012 and found Babulal thereat in a state of unconsciousness and they also found the shoes of Babu Lal and Baans Bhaari, lying near him at the said place.
2.1. As per the complainant, under such circumstances, the complainant alongwith one Ratan took Babu Lal in the state of unconsciousness to General Hospital and he was admitted therein. On 24.12.2012 (the date of written information) at about 6:00 a.m., Babu Lal expired. It was further stated that at the time of fight in question between deceased Babu Lal and Punja (accusedappellant), the deceased sustained grievous injuries on his head, and the same was stated to be the cause of the death in question. The complainant further stated that at the time of submission of the written information, the dead body of Late Babu Lal was lying in the Mortuary of the Hospital.
3. On the basis of the aforementioned written information given by the complainant, an FIR bearing No.470/2012 (Ex.P-5) dated 24.12.2012 was registered at Police Station, Gordhanvilas, Udaipur for the offence under Section 302 IPC, and the investigation accordingly commenced thereafter.
4. Upon completion of the investigation, the concerned investigating officer submitted a charge-sheet under Section 302 IPC before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Udaipur; wherefrom, owing to the nature of offence in question, the matter was committed to the learned Trial Court for framing of charges and the due trial and adjudication.
4.1. On 04.02.2013, the learned Trial Court framed the charge against the accused-appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC and the said charge was read over to the accused-appellant; the accused-appellant denied the same, and sought due trial, and the trial accordingly commenced thereafter before the learned Trial Court.
4.2. During the course of trial, the evidence of 13 prosecution witnesses were recorded and 18 documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution, whereas, the accused-appellant did not produce any evidence in support of defence; whereafter, the accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which the accused-appellant pleaded innocence and his false implication in the criminal case in question.
4.3. The learned Trial Court thereafter, fra
The essential ingredient of motive/intention under Section 302 IPC must be established to convict a person for the offence of murder.
The judgment established that lack of clear motive or intention can impact the application of Section 302 IPC and lead to a reduced conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC.
The judgment establishes the importance of dying declarations and the application of appropriate sections of the IPC based on the circumstances and intention of the accused.
The reliability of dying declaration, the role of hostile witnesses, and the distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder in cases of death due to septicemia.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on dying declaration as a sole basis for conviction under Section 302/34 of IPC, the interpretation of Section 498A of IPC, and the ap....
The dying declaration and FIR can form the basis of conviction if found to be reliable and consistent, and the court may apply exceptions to relevant sections of the IPC to determine the appropriate ....
Dying declarations can be the basis for conviction if they are found to be truthful and voluntary; however, they must be carefully scrutinized, especially in the absence of corroborative evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.