Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Pritinker Diwaker, Nalin Kumar Srivastava, JJ.
Puttan Yadav @ Vipin – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 386 of 2014
Decided On : 03-02-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304 - Criminal appeal - Stipulation of default clause - Present criminal appeal has been preferred by appellant against judgement and order passed by Sessions Judge, in Sessions Trial, arising out of case crime, convicting and sentencing appellant for offence punishable under Section 304 (Part-I) IPC to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of with stipulation of default clause - Held, Hon'ble Apex Court, as discussed above, has held that undue harshness should be avoided taking into account the reformative approach underlying in criminal justice system - Adopting same reformative approach, we consider that no accused person is incapable of being reformed and, therefore, all measures should be applied in order to bring them in social stream - Keeping in view reformative theory of punishment and “doctrine of proportionality”, it appears to us that sentence of life imprisonment awarded under Section 304 (Part-I) IPC by learned trial Court to appellant is too harsh and severe - Appellant is in jail since i.e. for last more than ten year - This fact is also admitted by learned AGA - Hence, Court are of considered view that since appellant has already served-out more than ten years jail sentence, sentence of life imprisonment under Section 304 (Part-I) IPC is converted into sentence already undergone, which would meet ends of justice - Appeal partly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant Puttan Yadav @ Vipin against the judgement and order dated 20.1.2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat in Sessions Trial No.91 of 2013 (State vs. Puttan Yadav @ Vipin), arising out of case crime no. 638 of 2012, convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 304 (Part-I) IPC to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-with stipulation of default clause.
2. Brief facts of the case, as culled out from the record, are that a written report was submitted by the complainant Gore Lal son of Ram Nath, resident of village Chakeri, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar at Police Station-Akbarpur, District-Kanpur Dehat in which averments were made that Km. Laxmi, niece (bhanji) of the informant, aged about two years, had sustained injuries and she was hospitalized at Kabir Hospital, Kanpur Nagar by the appellant and his family members. She expired during treatment. Anita, sister of the informant, was also harassed by the accused persons.
3. On the basis of the written report (Ext. ka-1), Death Information Report (Ext. ka-2) was registered at Police Station concerned on 30.10.2012 at 9.15 a.m., mentioning all the details as described in Ext. Ka-1. After post mortem and enquiry, a G.D. entry for registration of the case was also made, which is Ext. Ka-3.
4. Investigation of the case proceeded. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses, inspected the spot and prepared site plan. He also prepared the inquest report of the deceased and papers relating to post mortem.
5. Post mortem of the dead body of the deceased was performed and Autopsy report (Ext. ka-4) was prepared by Dr. Sanjeev Kumar on 30.10.2012 at 2.30 p.m. On examination of the dead body of the deceased, following ante-mortem injuries were found:
(2) Abrasion – 2 cm X 1 cm over left side of fore head, approx 4 cm above Left eye brow.
(3) Contusion–2 cm X2 cm, at vertex (Top of scalp).
(4) Contusion – Swelling – 4 cm X 4 cm, over occipital region.
(5) Contusion–5 cm X 4 cm, over right cheek.
(6) Contusion–3 cm X3 cm, over left cheek.”
6. In the opinion of the doctor, death was caused by reason of shock due to injuries on vital parts (Head Injury).
7. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet (Ext. ka-12) against the accused appellant was filed. Concerned Magistrate took the cognizance and the case, being exclusively triable by Sessions Court, was committed to the Court of Sessions.
8. Accused appeared before the trial court and charge under Section 304 IPC was framed against him. Appellant denied the charge and claimed his trial.
9. Trial proceeded and to bring home the charge against the accused / appellant, prosecution has examined in all five witnesses, who are as follows:
| 1 | Gore Lal | PW-1 (informant) |
| 2 | Smt. Anita | PW-2 (mother of the deceased) |
| 3 | Head Constable Ram Autar | PW-3 (scribe of G.D.) |
| 4 | Dr. Sanjiv Kumar | PW-4 (who performed the autopsy of the deceased) |
| 5 | Adhya Prasad Verma | PW-5 (Investigating Officer) |
10. In support of oral version, following documents were filed and proved on behalf of the prosecution:
| 1 | Written report | Ext. A-1 |
| 2 | Death information G.D. | Ext. A-2 |
| 3 | Registration G.D. | Ext. A-3 |
| 4 | Post mortem report | Ext. A-4 |
| 5 | Inquest Report | Ext. A-5 |
| 6 | Letter to C.M.O. | Ext. A-6 |
| 7 | Challan Nash | Ext. A-7 |
| 8 | Letter to C.M.O. | Ext. A-8 |
| 9 | Letter to R.I. | Ext. A-9 |
| 10 | Photo Nash | Ext. A-10 |
| 11 | Site plan | Ext. A-11 |
| 12 | Charge sheet | Ext. A-12 |
11. After conclusion of evidence, statement of accused appellant was recorded under Sec
The court established that sudden provocation can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter, particularly in domestic disputes.
The court reiterated that a conviction can be upheld based on a single reliable eyewitness, and emphasized proportionality in sentencing, especially when no minimum punishment is mandated by law.
Conviction under Section 302, IPC was altered to Section 304 for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, based on the heat of passion during a family quarrel.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal provisions related to culpable homicide and murder, and the consideration of the reformative theory of punishment in sente....
The court applied the reformative theory of punishment and the doctrine of proportionality in sentencing, considering the evidence and the absence of premeditation.
The judgment established the principle that the evidence of a single eyewitness must be reliable and corroborated by independent evidence from the attending circumstances of the case. The court empha....
The credibility of eyewitnesses, even if related to the victim, does not diminish their account's reliability if corroborated by medical evidence.
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
