Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, R.POORNIMA
Sulthan Alavudeen – Appellant
Versus
State, Represented by its, The Inspector of Police – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the incident and prosecution's case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments raised by the appellant and the prosecution. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's findings on evidence and witness credibility. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. final decision on the appeal. (Para 25) |
JUDGMENT :
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
This appeal has been preferred as against the Judgment passed in S.C.No.51 of 2019 dated 20.04.2022, on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai.
2.The case of the prosecution is that P.W.2 and accused are classmates and friends. Through P.W.2, the deceased and P.W.3 to P.W.10 were also friends of the accused. While being so, on 22.07.2018 at about 08.00 p.m., all of them were consuming liquor in Queen Bar at Solai Alagupuram. P.W.10 came there. It was accused's turn to buy liquor, which was consumed along with his friends. At that juncture, when the accused took out his wallet, P.W.10 had commented that the said wallet was very nice. The accused replied that he had purchased it for Rs.500/- and also stated that he had given the said wallet to P.W.2 at free of cost. After hear
The court affirmed that the prosecution met the burden of proof for murder and attempted murder, establishing intent and lack of self-defense.
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 prosecution failed to prove murder due to significant evidence discrepancies and delays in reporting, highlighting reasonable doubt regarding the appellant's guilt.
The court reaffirmed that specific overt acts are crucial for conviction in homicide cases, while witness reliability, particularly regarding tutoring, significantly impacts the assessment of evidenc....
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 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 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 distinguished culpable homicide from murder based on intentions and provocation, identifying a lack of mens rea for a murder conviction.
Evidentiary reliability of eyewitness accounts is critical in sustaining a conviction, even against contradictory testimonies.
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
