Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, DEVENDRA SINGH-I
Dharmendra @ Chandra Prakash – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed by appellant-Dharmendra alias Chandra Prakash against a judgment and order dated 08.06.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Jhansi in Sessions Trial No. 336 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 80 of 2014, under Section 302 IPC whereby the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in case of default in payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo additional imprisonment of one year.
Brief Facts of the case
2. The facts that formed the bedrock of the present criminal appeal, in short compass, are that a written report was handed over by the first informant Rohit Kumar, son of Kailash Narain at police station Uldan at 01:30 AM on 23.07.2014 that on 22.07.2017 at about 08:30 PM, his cousin Dharmendra (hereinafter referred to as the accused-appellant), son of Vishwanath Srivas, who is permanent resident of village Dhabari, police station Tahrauli, district Jhansi and is presently residing with his grand-maternal father (Nana) at village Rajpura, police station Uldan, district Jhansi. Since accused
The appellate court modified the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 IPC, recognizing the absence of premeditation and intention to kill during a sudden altercation influenced by the accused's....
The court modified conviction from murder to culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC, establishing that the incident arose from sudden provocation and was not premeditated.
The court held that when a death occurs from a single blow in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, it may be classified under Section 304 IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The court altered the conviction from murder under Section 302 to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part-II, emphasizing the absence of premeditation and the nature of the incident as a sudden figh....
The court held that the appellant's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC due to lack of premeditation and presence of heat of passion.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal principles to determine the appropriate offense based on the nature of injuries and intention.
The court ruled that the Appellant's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC due to lack of premeditation and presence of heat of passion.
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
