SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Ori) 9

High Court Of Orissa
B. K. Behera And D. P. Mohapatra, JJ.
MANDANGI SAMBURU - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
Jail Criminal Appeal 74  Of  1981
Decided On : 01/29/1981

Advocates Appeared:
B.L.N.SWAMY, N.C.PANIGRAHI

The court considered the lack of intention to cause death and the circumstances of the occurrence in reducing the appellant's conviction and sentencing.

Headnote:

Murder - Indian Penal Code - Conviction under section 301 for murder - Appellant's conviction reduced to section 304 Part II - Appellant set at liberty

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under section 301 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Mandangi Arjun by hitting his head with a stone, resulting in his death. The trial court's findings were not challenged, and the appellant had been in custody for over four and a half years.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the occurrence was a result of a sudden quarrel over the distribution of jackfruits, and the appellant, belonging to an aboriginal tribe, did not have the intention of causing the death of the deceased. The court reduced the appellant's conviction to section 304 Part II and sentenced him to the period already undergone, setting him at liberty.

Issues: Conviction under section 301 for murder, appellant's intention, and appropriate sentencing

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the circumstances of the occurrence, the lack of pre-plan or pre-meditation, and the appellant's belonging to an aboriginal tribe in determining the appropriate conviction and sentencing.

Final Decision: The order of conviction and the sentence under section 302 were set aside, and the appellant was convicted under section 304 Part II and sentenced to the period already undergone, being set at liberty forthwith.

B. K. BEHERA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant stands convicted under section 301 of the Indian Penal Code for short, IPC the Code for having committed the murder of Mandangi Arjun (hereinafter referred to as the deceasedt), on March 8, 1980, in village Lenda in the district, of Koraput, by hitting his head by a piece of stone (M. O. II) and causing injuries which resulted in his death and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The findings recorded by the trial court that the deceased died a homicidal death and that the appellant had assaulted the deceased on his head by MOlt as deposed to by P. W. 2, the sole witness to the occurrence, have not been assailed. Mr. Swamy for the appellant has submitted that the case against the appellant would come under the purview of section 304 Part II of the Code and the sentence passed against him should be reduced to the period already undergone as the appellant has been in custody and has undergone imprisonment for over four and a half years.

( 2 ) THE occurrence had taken place on the spur of the moment after a sudden quarrel between the appellant and the deceased over the distribution of jack fruits of a tree. The co-accused Palaka Durmaya, who also stood trial and was acquitted, intervened and at this, the deceased attempted to assault the co-accused by means of a stick which was snatched away by the co-accused who assaulted the: deceased as a result of which he fell down. The appellant then assaulted the deceased on his head by means of a stone without any pre-plan or pre-meditation and this unfortunately resulted in. his death. As has been submitted at the Bar, the appellant belongs to an aboriginal tribe and persons belonging to such tribes un easily inflammable by nature. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant bad the intention of causing the death of the deceased. It would be reasonable to hold that the appellant had the knowledge that by his act he was likely to cause the death or the deceased. The appellant is liable to be convicted under section 304 Part II of the Code.

( 3 ) IN the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The order of conviction and the sentence passed against the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code are set aside and in lieu thereof, he is convicted under section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced thereunder to undergo imprisonment for the period already undergone by him. The appellant be set at liberty forthwith. Appeal allowed in part.

.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top