Back
C. V. KARTHIKEYAN, R. POORNIMA
Ponvandu @ Ponraj – Appellant
Versus
State rep. By – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by R.POORNIMA, J.)
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for the entire records connected to the judgment in S.C.No.3 of 2017 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Thoothukudi, dated 19.08.2019 and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed against the appellant.
This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence passed against the accused/appellant in the judgment dated 19.08.2019 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi, in S.C.No.03 of 2017 convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo six months simple imprisonment.
2. The appellant submitted that originally the respondent herein registered a case in Crime No.481 of 2015 dated 24.07.2015 for the alleged offence under Section 302 IPC. After completion of investigation, the respondent Police filed a charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thoothukudi, in PRC.No.47 of 2016. Subsequently, he committed the case to the II Additiona
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(ii) IPC, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the presence o....
The court ruled that solitary eyewitness testimony can suffice for conviction in murder cases, especially when corroborated by medical evidence. The culpable act did not fall under provocation except....
Conviction modified from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to inconsistencies in witness testimonies and insufficient evidence linking the accused to the weapon used in the crim....
The Court upheld the life imprisonment conviction under Section 302 IPC, affirming the case as murder due to the absence of sudden provocation and corroborative evidence supporting the eyewitness's t....
Part II of Section 304 of IPC comes into play when the death is caused by doing an act with knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but there is no intention on the part of the accused either to ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the evidence of eyewitnesses, the injured witness, and the medical evidence played a crucial role in establishing the guilt of the accused bey....
If intention of accused was limited to infliction of a bodily injury sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and did not extend to intention of causing death, offence would be murder.
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to the absence of premeditation and the nature of the altercation, altering the conviction fr....
The court distinguished between murder and culpable homicide, ruling that the appellant's act was committed in the heat of passion without premeditation, thus constituting culpable homicide not amoun....
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
