Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.JAYACHANDRAN, R.POORNIMA, JJ.
Karthi @ Karthikeyan - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.A(MD)No.515 of 2021
Decided on : 28-04-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 304, and 324 - Conviction for murder and attempted murder - Appellant initially convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment - Court found that the act was not premeditated and modified conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC, sentencing to ten years - Evidence of eyewitnesses and medical reports established the case against the appellant. (Paras 1, 26, 27)
(B) Exception IV to Section 300 IPC - The court discussed the necessary ingredients for a sudden fight, emphasizing that the act must be without premeditation and not cruel or unusual - The appellant's actions were deemed to fall under this exception. (Paras 20, 24)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, after a quarrel, attacked family members of the complainant, resulting in the death of one and injuries to others. The incident arose from a trivial issue when the appellant's vehicle hit a child. (Paras 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court found the evidence sufficient to convict under Section 304 Part II IPC, modifying the earlier conviction under Section 302 IPC. The appellant was sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. (Paras 26, 27)
Issues: The main issues included whether the act constituted murder or fell under the exception for culpable homicide and the reliability of eyewitness testimonies. (Paras 9, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the appellant lacked the intention to kill, modifying the conviction based on the nature of the incident and the evidence presented. (Paras 25, 26)
Result: The Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
G.JAYACHANDRAN, R.POORNIMA, J.
Karthi @ Karthikeyan, the Appellant herein aged about 25 years at the time of the fateful incident, tried for offences under sections 324, 307 and 302 IPC by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, in S.C.No.65 of 2016. Finally, he was held guilty of offences under section 302 IPC and Section 324(2 counts). Sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC with fine of Rs 5000/-, and punished to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (two counts) for the offence under Section 324 IPC.
2. Challenging the order of conviction and sentence passed in S.C.No. 65 of 2016 dated 22.10.2022, the above Criminal Appeal is filed.
3. Gist of the prosecution case:
On 20.11.2014 at about 11.30 hrs, the appellant was riding his two wheeler Hero Honda Splender bearing Registration No.TN-48-T-1596 along the street of the de-facto complainant Ms.Kriuthika. He hit a kid by name Karuppan, who was playing in the street. The said Karuppan is the sister’s son of the de-facto complainant. This was questioned by the mother of the kid, de-facto complainant(PW-1), her father(Manian – PW.2) and her brother Govindaraj(deceased). Wordy quarrel arose between them. The appellant went to his house came back and attacked Manian with a knife. When Manian defended the attack, he sustained cut injury on the left hand. When Govindraj tried to intervene, Karthi stabbed him on the abdomen thrice. On seeing this, Pothumponnu, the sister of the de-facto complainant came to rescue Govindaraj. The appellant stabbed Pothumponnu on her chest. When the de-facto complainant started raising alarm, the appellant fled with the knife.
4. Manian and Govindaraj were taken to the Government Hospital at Trichy by the de-facto complainant and others. The said Pothumponnu went separately to the hospital. The doctors examined Govindaraj and declared ‘brought dead’. Manian and Pothumponnu were treated for the injuries. Manian recovered and deposed as PW-2. Pending trial Pothumponnu died, her wound certificate marked as prosecution exhibit.
5. After admitting her father in the hospital, Kiruthika(PW-1) came to the police station and gave the written complaint(Ex.P-1) on 20.11.2014 at 13.30 hrs. The complaint was registered in Cr.No.417 of 2014 by PW-24, the Inspector of Police, attached to Somarasanpettai Police Station, against Karthi for offences under Sections 307 and 302 IPC. The FIR copy was forwarded to the Judicial Magistrate through express post. PW-24 went to the place of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar(Ex P- 2 ), rough sketch of the scene of crime (Ex.P-12) and recorded the statements of witnesses present. Collected blood stains on the earth and the two wheeler TN-48-T-1596 under mahazar Ex.P.3 and forwarded the material objects to the Judicial Magistrate Court under Form 95.
6. The Investigating Officer, went to the hospital and after conducting the inquest, arranged for the post mortem. The inquest report is Ex.P-13. The Post mortem report of Govindaraj is Ex.P-6. On 21.11.2014, at about 10.00 a.m., the appellant Karthic was arrested at Kirikalmedu Bus Stand. His confession was recorded in the presence of witnesses. On his information, the knife M.O-1(22.5 cm length - plastic handle 11.5 cm; blade 11 cm) used for the assault and the two wheeler used to escape from the scene of crime and the clothes, he was wearing at the time of occurrence with blood stains were recovered under mahazar(Ex.P-15). The soil, Knife and dress materials of the deceased and the accused were sent for chemical analysis. The report says, blood found in the clothes and knife, but not in the soil collected from the scene of occurrence.
7. The final report filed by PW-24 was taken cognizance and case committed to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Trichy. The II Additional Sessions Court framed charges under section 307 IPC for attempt to murder Manian, Section 302 IPC for the murder of Govindaraj and Section 324 IPC for causing hur
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC, emphasizing the absence of premeditation.
The court affirmed that the 1st accused's act of stabbing the deceased constituted murder, rejecting the applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC due to the absence of mutual combat.
Sudden quarrel without premeditation, single stab in heat of passion without undue advantage or cruelty attracts Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC; offence reduced from Section 302 murder to Section 304....
The court modified the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident as a sudden quarrel.
The act of the appellant was deemed culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to lack of premeditation and the nature of the quarrel, qualifying for Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
The court determined that the absence of premeditation and intent to kill qualified the act as culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
The court modified the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the altercation as a sudden fight.
(1) Murder – Adequacy or otherwise of medical attention is not a relevant factor when doctor who conducted post-mortem clearly deposed that death was caused due to cardio respiratory failures, as a r....
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
