Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Prem Narayan Singh
Raju – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prem Narayan Singh, J.
1. This criminal appeal is preferred under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31.01.2023, passed by learned A.S.J., Ratlam, in S.T. No..200291/2015 whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 304 /34 and 323/34 of IPC and sentenced for 10,10 years RI and 6,6 months RI with fine of Rs.2000/-, 2000/- and 1000/-,1000/- with default stipulations.
2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 10.08.2015, the complainant Mohan alongwith the deceased Munna was going to his home. The appellants were standing near the house of appellant Badri. Thereafter, appellant Raju has assaulted complainant Mohan by stick on his back and appellant Badri has assaulted the complainant and the deceased Munna by kicks and fists.Appellant Raju has assaulted the deceased Munna with stick, due to which, the deceased has received injuries. Thereafter, deceased Munna was succumbed those injuries. thereafter, Munna was collapsed down. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the hospital where he has died.
3..The police party, after following due procedure, arrested the accused person and registered the case
Conviction requires reliable evidence and knowledge of victim's medical condition; lacking such knowledge limits liability to lesser offenses.
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.
Point of law : Admittedly according to the prosecution's own case Ran Singh and Rattan Singh were carrying lathies which could be described as hard and blunt object. Such injuries on the person of th....
The lack of evidence identifying which appellant inflicted the fatal injury necessitates a conviction reduction to a lesser charge.
The court established that the nature of injuries and intent are crucial in determining the appropriate charge under IPC, emphasizing the need for substantial evidence linking actions to the cause of....
cCnduct of the appellant, from the evidence led by the prosecution itself, indicates that neither was there any premeditation nor an intention to kill the deceased.
The court established that culpable homicide can be distinguished from murder based on the presence of intention and premeditation, particularly in cases of sudden provocation.
Witness testimonies cannot be discarded solely due to their relation to the victim; evidence must be considered on credibility and context, with mitigating factors influencing sentencing.
The court modified convictions from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, emphasizing the need for established common intention among accused, reflecting principles of reasonable doubt....
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
