SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, RATNAKER BHENGRA
Pato Marandi, son of Sufal Marandi – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Shree Chandrashekhar, J.
The sole appellant has suffered imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of his wife Suraj Muni Murmu. The order of sentence dated 20th December 2017 follows a default stipulation of SI for six months to be undergone by the appellant.
2. Barhait PS Case No 48 of 2012 has been registered on the basis of the fardbeyan of Ravan Murmu who is the father of Suraj Muni Murmu. The fardbeyan of Ravan Murmu was recorded on 27th June 2012 by Garib Das who was the officer-in-charge of Barhait Police Station at Primary Health Center, Barhait. The informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence as on the previous night he had gone to village Paharpur to attend a marriage ceremony. There he received an information about murder of his daughter whereupon he came back home and took his daughter to the hospital where his statement was recorded by Garib Das.
3. In his fardbeyan, Ravan Murmu has stated that his daughter came home on 20th June 2012 and two days thereafter his son-in-law also came at Khairwa, Teeta Tola and joined his wife in his house. He has further stated that when he came back hom
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal provisions under the Indian Penal Code, particularly the distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to....
The court established that the presence of intention to kill, the nature of the weapon used, and the circumstances of the quarrel are critical in determining whether an act constitutes murder or a le....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of eyewitness testimony, medical evidence, and the application of legal provisions in establishing guilt and justifying the conviction and sentence.
Culpable homicide may be reduced to a lesser charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder if committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel without premeditation, as per Exception 4 ....
Point of Law : Amicus Curie has not been able to show that the above parameters have been satisfied, so as to take the prosecution case out of the purview of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
A conviction for murder requires reliable and corroborated evidence, particularly when based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness; contradictions and lack of corroboration can lead to the reversal o....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on intention and circumstances, with the court applying Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC in cases of sudden quarrel.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder hinges on the offender's intention, with insufficient evidence of intent leading to a reduced sentence.
The judgment established the distinction between murder and culpable homicide, and the factors to be considered for awarding appropriate sentence under IPC 302 or IPC 304 Part-II.
The court affirmed that the appellant's actions constituted murder under Section 302 IPC, rejecting claims of provocation.
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.