Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Manoj Kumar Garg, Ravi Chirania
Basti Ram S/o Sh. Shri Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.
1. All the aforesaid matters, two criminal appeals and one revision petition, have arisen out of the common judgment dated 09.07.1997, passed by learned Session Judge, Pali, in Sessions Case No.78/1988 by which the learned Trial Court acquitted the accused Smt. Pyari from offence under Sections 147 , 148, 302/149, 323, 323/149 IPC and convicted the accused-appellant No.1 Bastiram for offence under Sections 302 & 323 IPC and accused-appellants No.2 to 4 namely Kalu, Champalal & Madan for offence under Section 323 IPC.
2. For offence under Section 323 IPC, the trial court sentenced the accused appellants with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo three months’ SI.
3. Whereas, for offence under Section 302 IPC, the learned trial court sentenced the accused-appellant No.1 Bastiram to undergo life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months’ RI.
4. Since all the matters are arising out of the same judgment and order, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.
5. Criminal Appeal No.351/1997 has been filed by the accused-appellants against their conviction
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide is fundamentally based on the presence or absence of intent, with actions classified under Section 304 Part II when committed without intention to....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide depends on the presence of intent; absence of premeditation warrants a lesser charge under Section 304 Part II IPC.
Absence of premeditation and intent to kill during an altercation qualifies the act as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC Section 304 Part II.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder depends on the presence of intent and premeditation, especially in cases of sudden provocation.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide lies in the presence of intent and premeditation, with spontaneous acts being treated as culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
The court established that absence of intention to kill, even in a fatal altercation, can lead to a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of intention and premeditation in categorizing the offence under the Indian Penal Code.
Culpable homicide is not murder if committed in a fit of passion during a sudden quarrel, as determined by Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.
(1) Intention of a person cannot be proved by direct evidence but is to be deduced from the facts and circumstances of a case – ‘Intent’ and ‘knowledge’ cannot be equated with each other – They conno....
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
