Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, GAUTAM CHOWDHARY
Natthu Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.
1. These appeals arise out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 1.6.2019, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anoopshahar, Bulandshahar in Sessions Trial No.647 of 2006 (CNR No. UPBU07000005-2006), State Vs. Natthu Singh and others, arising out of Case Crime No.35 of 2006, Police Station Naraura, District Bulandshahar, whereby the accused appellants Natthu Singh, and Ramveer have been convicted and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 IPC ; ten years rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.10,000/- each under Section 307/149 IPC ; rigorous life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.25,000/- each under Section 302/149 IPC, whereas accused appellant Raju has been convicted and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 IPC ; ten years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 307/149 IPC ; rigorous life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.25,000/- under Section 302/149 IPC ; five years rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 452 IPC, and accused appellant Malkhan has been convicted and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment
The court modified convictions from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the accused's intent to inflict grievous injury rather than to kill.
The court established that the assault on the deceased was provoked by a land dispute, determining it constituted culpable homicide rather than murder due to the lack of intent to kill.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide under Section 299 IPC and the offence under Part II of Section 304 IPC, based on the presence of intentio....
Point of Law : Section 34 does not create a substantive offence. The vicarious or constructive liability under Section 34 IPC can arise only when two conditions stand fulfilled, i.e., the mental elem....
Conviction modified - Offence of Murder - Injured witnesses P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 had received injuries of blunt object, which were caused by accused-appellants with Lathis and Dandas but injuries w....
Murder - Conviction - Appellatn murdered deceased with a deadly weapon i.e. countrymade pistol, which was his individual act and he is responsible for the same, hence, he is convicted for the offence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while individuals have the right to private defence of their property, causing death in excess of this right constitutes an offence under the ....
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
