IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of assessing the circumstances and facts of the case to determine the nature of the offence, particularly in cases involving the applicability of the Exceptions in Section 300 of the Penal Code.

JUDGMENT

Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. - The short ground canvassed in this appeal is that the conviction in this case could not have been under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as the circumstances were such that the offence had to be regarded as culpable homicide not amounting to murder and dealt with under Section 304 of the Penal Code.

2. There is very little dispute as to the circumstances pertaining to the incident that took place on January 2, 2009 when both the victim and the appellant herein had gone for a picnic with several other villagers to a place called Jrikhla.

3. According to the appellant, he was intoxicated and upon being insulted and threatened by the victim, there was a quarrel; and, in the heat of the moment, the appellant took out his knife, stabbed the victim and fled the spot. The appellant apparently immediately confided in his two relatives who were later called as PW 1 and PW 2 at the trial. The appellant also made a confession under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to the following effect:

'On 2nd January, 09 around 5:30 P.M. I had been for picnic with my friend on reaching Jrikhla, I sat there with my two friends suddenly one Shri. Rida Dkhar of Lumstong threatened me. Since I am in intoxicated mood I stabbed him with my own knife. That's all I remember and fled of my house.'

4. No eye-witness was presented by the prosecution, though the case that was made out was that about 100 villagers had gone for the picnic with a local leader. Only one of the witnesses claimed that upon hearing that a fight had broken out, such witness went to the spot and found the victim with his intestines having coming out of his abdomen. Such witness did not, actually, see the act being perpetrated or the victim being assaulted. The victim was taken to the hospital and died subsequently.

5. Both PW 1 and PW 2, uncles of the appellant herein, testified that they had been informed of the incident by the appellant. PW 1 claimed that he was asked by the police to search for the murder weapon, whereupon he went to the place of occurrence and found the knife which was handed over to the police.

6. In the state of evidence that was before the trial court, there was nothing to suggest that there was any long-standing enmity between the appellant and the victim or that there could have been any possibility of the appellant of having premeditated the murder or having any intention to kill the victim.

7. The fourth Exception in Section 300 of the Penal Code speaks of death being caused, without premeditation, in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel. The additional conditions indicated in the provision are that the offender should not have taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner. The width of the provision is enlarged by the Explanation thereto which provides that it is immaterial as to which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault.

8. As per the statement of the appellant before the Magistrate, the appellant and two friends were sitting around when the victim arrived and threatened the appellant. However, neither the nature nor the manner of the threat is described for any possible assessment as to whether the provocation was so grave and sudden that the appellant's retaliation would be covered by the first Exception in Section 300 of the Penal Code.

9. At the same time, it is evident from the testimony of the witness who claimed to have arrived at the place of occurrence and found the victim with his intestines out that the word had gone around that a quarrel and a fight had taken place. Thus, upon the appreciation of the material before the trial court, it is apparent that a quarrel broke out which progressed to a fight upon the victim threatening the appellant. It is possible that in course of such quarrel that culminated into a fight, the appellant, in the heat of passion, took out his knife and stabbed the victim.

10. It is submitted on behalf of the State that the ap