Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH
Bhura Alias Kamlesh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. summary of accusation and initial proceedings (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. appellant's arguments against the conviction (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. court's observations on the admissibility of evidence (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. legal principles concerning dying declarations (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. medical evidence related to victim's injuries and death (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. court's final reasoning and decision (Para 35 , 56 , 57) |
| 8. conclusion and order of the court (Para 58 , 59) |
JUDGMENT :
Hirdesh, J.
1.Being dissatisfied with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26-03-2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chachoda, District Guna(MP) in Sessions Trial No.21 of 2017, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Imprisonment for Life with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment, this appeal was filed.
2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 15-11-2016, complainant- Rajendra Singh Kurmi was admitted in a burnt condition in Burn Ward of District Hospital, Guna where Duty Dr.V
A statement can be treated as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, constituting valid evidence if it inspires confidence, even if it was recorded under Section 161 of CrPC, an....
The court ruled that the actions of the appellants amounted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, reducing their conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC due to lack of intent.
Point of Law : Crimes against women are not ordinary crimes committed in a fit of anger or for property. They are social crimes. They disrupt the entire social fabric. Hence, they call for harsh puni....
The reliability of dying declarations and the application of the fourth exception to Section 300 of IPC in cases of sudden quarrel and heat of passion.
The court upheld the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, affirming that the evidence established the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt despite claims of accidental death.
The court held that the accused lacked intent to kill, resulting in conviction for culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC instead of murder under Section 302 IPC.
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
