Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(MP) 707

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Prem Narayan Singh, J.
Munshikha And Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 12259 of 2023
Decided On : 23-12-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta, Shri Palash Choudhary, learned counsel
For the Respondent:Shri Surendra Gupta, Govt. Advocate

The court ruled that injuries caused were not sufficient to lead to death, thus altering the conviction from culpable homicide to grievous hurt under Section 325 IPC.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304(part-II)/34, 323/34, 452 - Conviction of appellants for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and other offences based on evidence presented. Appellants originally charged under more serious offences, but conviction modified to reflect lesser culpability due to lack of intent to cause death. (Paras 1-5, 24)

(B) Culpable Homicide - The court determined that the injuries caused were not of a nature to lead to death as per the ordinary course, hence modifying conviction accordingly. (Paras 22-21)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were involved in a physical altercation leading to the death of Madanlal, initially treated for grave injuries from a stone-pelting and subsequent assault. (Paras 2-3)

Findings of Court:
The injuries, including a stomach injury resulting in death from septicemia, were determined not to meet the threshold for murder; conviction was modified from Section 304 to Section 325 instead. (Paras 22-24)

Issues: The core issue was whether the injuries caused by the appellants resulted in culpable homicide or fit within a lesser offence. (Paras 10, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for Section 304 to apply, there must be intent or knowledge regarding the death; given the circumstances, Section 325 was appropriate. (Paras 16-21)

Result: Appeal partly allowed; conviction modified to Section 325, with sentences adjusted accordingly.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments about the conviction and sentence (Para 6 , 7)
3. consideration of the trial court's decision (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. witness testimonies and evidentiary support (Para 11 , 12 , 15)
5. legal interpretation of culpable homicide (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
6. final judgment and sentencing (Para 22 , 23 , 24)

JUDGMENT :

PREM NARAYAN SINGH, J.

1. Appellants have preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.08.2023, passed by learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, in S.T. No.67/2016 whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 304(part-II)/34, 323/34, 452 of IPC, 1860 and sentenced to undergo 10 years, 3 months and 5 years RI with fine of Rs.25,000/-, Rs.1,000/- and Rs.5,000/- each with default stipulations.

2. Prosecution case in a nutshell is that on 10.01.2016, the children of deceased Madanlal were playing in the place just opposite to their house, then appellant Munshikha's son came there and started flying kite. When deceased Madanlal forbade him from flying kite and asked him to return back to his house, then Munshikha's son started hurling abuses and pelted stone on deceased's stomach thereafter, Madanlal and his children went inside their house. After some time, appellant Munshikha and his two sons came to deceased's house, started hurling abuses. It is further alleged that the accused persons assaulted deceased and his father with sticks, kicks and fists, so also threatened to kill the complainant party. Deceased Madanlal received injuries in his stomach and his father sustained injuries in his forehead and left ribs. The injured persons were admitted in District Hospital, Mandsaur and as the injuries sustained by Madanlal were grievous in nature he was shifted to Maharaja Bhoopal Govt. Hospital, Udaipur wherein Madanlal died during treatment. In this case, dehatinalishi (Ex.-P/6) was registered on the report of deceased Madanlala and on the basis of that dehatinalishi, FIR was lodged for the offences under Sections 294, 323, 452, 34 & 506.(Ex-P/7).

3. The police party, after following due procedure, arrested the accused person and registered the case against the appellants. Since injured Madanlal died during treatment, Section 302 of IPC has been added. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellants Munshikha and other co-accused persons before JMFC Mandsaur for offence under Sections 302, 323/34, 307/34, 294, 506-II and Section 452 of IPC, 1860. As Munshikha's son Sonu was a juvenile, he has been produced before the Juvenile Justice Board for further proceedings. The case against the appellants has been committed to the Court of Sessions, Mandsaur and in turn vide order dated 30.03.2016 the same was transferred to the Court of Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur. Thereafter, charges were framed under Sections 302, 307, 323 read with Sections 34 and Sections 294, 506 and 452 of IPC. In turn, appellants abjured their guilt and took a plea that they had been falsely implicated in the present crime and prayed for trial.

4. In support of the case, the prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses namely Lalu (PW-1), Mohanbai (PW-2), Mamta (PW-3), Mukesh (PW-4), Dr. Premchand Arya (PW-5), Ramnarayan Yadav (PW-6), Manish Lodha (PW-7) Zafar S/oo Lukman Khan (PW-8), Govardhan Rathore (PW- 9), Dr. S.P. Gupta (PW-10), Zafar S/o Burekhan (PW-11), Dr. Mohammed Irfan (PW-12), Vikram Singh (PW-13) K.S. Choudhary (PW-14) and Dalchand (PW-15). No witness has been adduced by the appellants in their defence.

5. Learned trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence and argument adduced by the parties, pronounced the impugned judgment on 29.08.2023, finally concluded the case and convicted the appellants for commission of the said offence under the provisions of Sections 323 /34, 304(Part-II)/34 and 452 of IPC 1860.

6. Learned counsel for the a