Ravi Valmik vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 300 Exception 4, 302, and 304 Part II - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32 - Conviction for murder challenged - Whether the act of setting a spouse on fire during a sudden domestic quarrel constitutes murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Dying declaration recorded by Executive Magistrate is reliable and can be the sole basis of conviction if it inspires confidence and the deceased was in a fit state of mind (Paras 21, 22, 25) - To invoke Exception 4 to Section 300, four requirements must be satisfied: (i) sudden fight, (ii) no premeditation, (iii) heat of passion, and (iv) no undue advantage or cruel/unusual manner (Paras 30, 32, 33, 36) - Act committed during a sudden domestic argument without premeditation, where the offender attempted to douse the fire, indicates lack of murderous intent but knowledge of likely death - Conviction modified from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC. (Paras 40, 41)

(B) Dying Declaration - Admissibility under Section 32 of Evidence Act - If found true, voluntary, and coherent, it can form the basis of conviction without further corroboration, provided the court is satisfied the deceased was in a fit state of mind and not tutored (Paras 21, 22).

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for setting his wife on fire using diesel following a domestic dispute. The victim provided a dying declaration implicating the husband before succumbing to her injuries. The trial court sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment. On appeal, it was contended that the incident occurred during a sudden quarrel and that the appellant had attempted to extinguish the fire by pouring water on the victim, indicating a lack of murderous intent.

Findings of Court:
The use of a flammable substance and extensive burn injuries were confirmed by medical and forensic evidence. The dying declaration was held to be credible and reliable. However, the court found the act was a result of a sudden domestic argument without premeditation or specific intent to kill, although the appellant possessed the knowledge that such reckless actions would likely result in death.

Issues: Whether the death was caused by the appellant and whether the act constitutes murder under Section 302 or culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when an act is committed without premeditation in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, and the offender does not act in a cruel manner or take undue advantage, the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC is applicable. The effort to douse the fire substantiated the absence of intent to kill, thereby justifying the modification of the conviction to Section 304 Part II.

Result: Appeal partly allowed; conviction under Section 302 IPC modified to Section 304 Part II IPC; sentence of life imprisonment reduced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Conviction under Section 302 IPC for murder by burning — Appeal against conviction and sentence. (Para 2 , 6 )

2. Appellant argues conviction unsustainable; prosecution supports conviction based on dying declaration and evidence. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 )

3. Conviction modified from Section 302 to Section 304 Part II IPC; sentence reduced to ten years rigorous imprisonment. (Para 41 , 42 )

4. Can a conviction be based solely on a dying declaration?

Yes, if the dying declaration inspires full confidence, is true and voluntary, and the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make the statement. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 )

5. What is the distinction between murder under Section 302 IPC and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC?

Murder requires intention to cause death or bodily injury likely to cause death; Section 304 Part II applies when death is caused with knowledge but without intention. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 )

6. What are the requirements to invoke Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC?

The act must be committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight, in heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel, and without undue advantage or cruel manner. (Para 30 , 32 , 33 )

7. When can a conviction under Section 302 IPC be altered to Section 304 Part II IPC?

When the act is reckless without murderous intent, as in a sudden domestic quarrel where the accused attempted to extinguish the fire. (Para 26 , 40 , 41 )

ORDER :

Hirdesh, J.

Instead of hearing on IA No.3062 of 2026, the third application filed on behalf of appellant- Ravi Valmik for suspension of jail sentence and grant of bail, with the consent of parties, this appeal is heard finally.

2. The instant criminal appeal under Section 372(2) of CrPC has been filed by appellant- Ravi Valmik, against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21-07-2022 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind (hereinafter it would be referred to as ''the trial Court'') in Sessions Trial No.66 of 2018 whereby, the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-; with default stipulation.

3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 04.11.2017, Police Post In-charge, Ramkumar Bhagat, at Police Post Machhand, Police Station Raun, District Bhind, received an information regarding burning of a woman, namely, Sushma Valmik in Village Laraul. ASI Ramprakash Parmar was sent to said village and enquired from villagers and specifically from those in Valmik Mohalla about the incident. It was found that Sushma had been burned before Diwali. Members of Sushma's maternal side arrived and admitted her in a burnt condition to Burn Unit of a hospital in Gwalior. Sushma was brought by a Dial 100 vehicle to the hospital for treatment. On 05.11.2017, Sushma was admitted to JA Hospital, Gwalior. On 06.11.2017, her Dying Declaration (Exhibit P7) was recorded by Executive Magistrate. In her Dying Declaration, Sushma deposed that on the date of incident, she was scolded by her husband Ravi (present appellant), mother-in-law Rambeti, and sister-in-law Meena for not collecting wood. Sushma deposed that Ravi poured diesel on her and set her on fire, while Rambeti and Meena instigated him to do so.

4. An investigation was conducted. On 23.11.2017, ASI Ramprakash Parmar recorded the statement of brother of Sushma- Majeet Singh, and the information was recorded in Roznamcha Sanha No. 59. On the basis of evidence collected and Dying Declaration, an FIR was registered under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC at Raun Police Station, vide Crime No.285/2017 on 23.11.2017. During investigation, it was found that on the basis of scolding and instigation, accused Ravi doused Sushma with diesel and set her on fire. Police prepared a spot map and collected various items from the scene of occurrence, including burnt hair, half-burnt pieces of a saree, and pieces of plastic. Additionally, matches and a plastic bottle containing remnants of diesel were found at the scene of occurrence. A panchnama (Exhibit P8) was prepared. On 26.11.2017, Sushma died in hospital due to complications from her burns. The death was reported to Police Station Kampoo, Gwalior, at 6:00 AM, and a merg No.0706/2017 under Section 174 CrPC was recorded at Police Station Kampoo. An inquest was conducted and a Safina form (Exhibit P-7A) was issued on 27.11.2017. The postmortem examination was carried out on the body of deceased at JA Hospital, Gwalior, and a sealed packet containing clothes, viscera, and salt was seized vide Exhibit P15. Thereafter, offence under Section 302 IPC was enhanced.

5. On 27.11.2017, police arrested appellant accused Ravi Valmik, vide arrest memo (Exhibit P9). The police recorded statements of witnesses Santosh and Dinesh on 05.01.2018, who confirmed seeing the victim in a burnt state but did not provide direct evidence how the incident occurred. A seizure panchnama (Exhibit P-6) was prepared on 10.01.2018 after deceased's clothes and viscera were sent for forensic examination. After examining viscera and other physical evidence, a report was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). The investigation concluded that the cause of death was consistent with severe burns resulting from being set on fire. On 15.03.2018, charge-sheet was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lahar, District Bhind, against accused Ravi Valmik under Section 3

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH, JJ.
Ravi Valmik – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 7834 Of 2022
Decided On : 10-02-2026

An act committed during a sudden domestic quarrel without premeditation, where the offender lacks specific intent to kill but possesses knowledge of the likely fatal consequences, falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and constitutes culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II IPC.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a conviction be based solely on a dying declaration?

5. What is the distinction between murder under Section 302 IPC and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC?

6. What are the requirements to invoke Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC?

7. When can a conviction under Section 302 IPC be altered to Section 304 Part II IPC?

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 612

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIORANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH, JJ.Ravi Valmik – Appellant VersusThe State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 7834 Of 2022Decided On : 10-02-2026

An act committed during a sudden domestic quarrel without premeditation, where the offender lacks specific intent to kill but possesses knowledge of the likely fatal consequences, falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and constitutes culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II IPC.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Can a conviction be based solely on a dying declaration?

5. What is the distinction between murder under Section 302 IPC and culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC?

6. What are the requirements to invoke Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC?

7. When can a conviction under Section 302 IPC be altered to Section 304 Part II IPC?

Cases Referred (9)

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH, JJ.
Ravi Valmik – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 7834 Of 2022
Decided On : 10-02-2026