Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, R.POORNIMA
Balasubramanian – Appellant
Versus
State, Rep. by its The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar Bazaar Police Station – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R.POORNIMA, J.
This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant/sole accused in the judgment dated 23.02.2021 made in S.C.No.92 of 2016 by the Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur, in which judgment, Accused had been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo six months simple imprisonment.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows :
(a) The complainant's sister Mareeswari (deceased), was married to Balasubramanian (accused) 17 years back. They were blessed with two children namely, Shanthi @ Malarselvi (P.W.3) and Suyambukumar @ Siva (P.W.4). On 03.10.2015 at about 2.30 p.m., the complainant and another witness, Moorthy, went to the house of the deceased. At that time, the accused was taking his lunch in the house, and his son and daughter (P.W.3 and P.W.4) were also present. The deceased returned home from the mill for lunch and, on seeing the accused eating food, started shouting at him, questioning how he could eat without going for any employment. In a fit o
Sustained provocation and heat of passion can reduce murder to culpable homicide, allowing for a lesser sentence under Section 304(II) IPC.
The court established that a homicide can be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder if committed under grave and sudden provocation, emphasizing the importance of context and the acc....
Extreme provocation can reduce murder charges under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC when intent to kill is absent.
The court established that culpable homicide can be distinguished from murder based on the presence of intention and premeditation, particularly in cases of sudden provocation.
The court affirmed that evidence must establish intention to commit murder, ruling that provocation claimed by the accused did not mitigate the crime, reaffirming conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The court ruled that actions taken under grave and sudden provocation can lead to a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, distinguishing it from murder under Section 302 IPC.
The court reaffirmed that intention and the nature of injuries are critical in distinguishing between murder and culpable homicide under IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the injury, the presence of a motive prior to the incident, and the absence of provocation are crucial factors in determining th....
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
