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.

JUDGMENT :

MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.

1. Instant criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 26.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sumerpur, District Pali, in Sessions Case No.18/2016 by which the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo two years simple imprisonment.

2. Brief facts necessary to be noted for deciding the controversy are that on 19.05.2016, complainant- Arjunlal submitted a written report (Ex-1) before the Police Station- Sumerpur to the effect that his sister's family was residing in Sumerpur. It was further reported that the complainant’s sister had recently passed away. The report indicated that the complainant’s nephew (hereinafter referred to as "the accused appellant") persistently demanded money from the complainant’s brother-in-law, Sakha Ram (deceased). He consistently refused to fulfill these monetary demands. As a result, the accused allegedly assaulted Sakha Ram. On the night of 18.05.2016, at approximately 11:00 PM, deceased- Sakha Ram and the accused were consuming alcohol. Subsequently, at around 01:00 AM, a heated altercation ensued between the complainant’s brother-in-law and the accused. During this altercation, the accused committed the murder of Sakha Ram. Approximately at 01:30 AM, the accused informed the complainant that he had murdered his father and subsequently absconded from the scene. The complainant immediately proceeded to his brother-in-law’s residence, where he was informed by the assembled witnesses that accused appellant-Ganpat had inflicted fatal injuries upon his father, Sakha Ram. On the said oral report, Police registered the FIR No.217/2016 against the accused-appellant and started investigation.

3. On completion of investigation, police filed challan against the accused-appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC.

4. Thereafter, learned Trial Court framed, read over and explained the charges for the offence under Section 302 IPC to the accused appellant. He denied the charge and sought trial.

5. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and also got exhibited relevant documents in support of its case.

6. The accused appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In defence, no witness was examined.

7. Learned trial Court, after hearing the arguments from both the sides, taking into consideration and appreciating the documentary evidence and the statements of witnesses, vide judgment dated 26.08.2019 convicted and sentenced the accused- appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Hence, this criminal appeal.

8. Mr. JVS Deora, learned counsel representing the accused appellant, has submitted that the appellant lacked any premeditated intent to cause harm to the deceased. He contends that the act of assault was spontaneous and occurred in a state of sudden provocation. Furthermore, he asserts that the appellant possessed neither motive nor intention to cause the death of the deceased. Consequently, he respectfully requests that the appellant not be convicted under Section 302 of the IPC, but rather under Section 304 PART I of the IPC. Additionally, counsel highlights that the incident took place in the year 2016, and the appellant has been in custody since 19.05.2016. He has already served more than nine years of imprisonment, including remission. In light of these facts, he respectfully prays that the sentence imposed