Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, R.POORNIMA
Kannan – Appellant
Versus
State rep. by The Inspector of Police – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
1. This appeal has been filed as against the Judgment passed in S.C.No.458 of 2016, dated 28.09.2022, on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Madurai, thereby convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC .
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused and the deceased were friends for the past three years before the date of occurrence. The deceased had lent a sum of Rs.1,000/- to the accused. On 04.12.2025 the deceased requested the accused to repay the said amount since he had some urgent needs. In response, the accused and the deceased traveled together to Sedapatti on the accused’s two-wheeler. At that juncture, at about 05.00 p.m., near a grocery shop, the accused assaulted the deceased with sprite glass bottle on his chest and stomach. Immediately, a 108 Ambulance was called, and the deceased was taken to Government Hospital, Thirumangalam. Despite medical attention, the deceased succumbed to his injuries on 10.12.2015.
3. On the basis of the complaint, the respondent registered an F.I.R in Crime No.169 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 324 and 307 of IPC . After demise, F
The court held that lack of clear intent in a violent altercation necessitated a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The court determined that acts committed in sudden provocation can result in a conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II instead of murder under Section 302 of IPC.
A conviction for culpable homicide requires establishing intent, which was lacking in this case, leading to a revised charge under Section 304 Part II IPC.
The court clarified that intention to kill is pivotal in distinguishing between murder and culpable homicide, confirming conviction under Section 304 Part II given absence of intent despite a fatal a....
The court emphasized differentiation between murder and culpable homicide based on intention and knowledge, holding the accused liable under Section 304 Part II for culpable homicide due to the absen....
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide hinges on the intention of the accused, with grave provocation leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part II instead of Section 302.
The court affirmed that the prosecution met the burden of proof for murder and attempted murder, establishing intent and lack of self-defense.
The court ruled that the appellant's actions stemmed from sudden provocation without intent to kill, modifying the conviction to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II.
The court established that a lack of premeditation and intention to kill in a sudden quarrel can lead to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
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
