Back
P. SAM KOSHY, SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
Mohd. Shaaker – Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sambasiva Rao Naidu, J.)
1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the sole accused in S.C.No.130 of 2014, under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C., and the appellant seeks to assail the Judgment dated 07.10.2014, whereunder the trial Court found him guilty for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and convicted him under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C. The appellant herein was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of (6) months.
2. The appellant herein was charge sheeted along with (3) others with an allegation that all of them have committed an offence under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC. As per the allegations made in the charge sheet, the prosecution has claimed that one Mohd. Ahmed (hereinafter be referred as deceased) was having illegal intimacy with one Mahmooda Begum since two (2) years prior to the alleged offence. However, the deceased started harassing her with a demand of Rs.50,000/- threatening her with dire consequences, if she failed to pay the said amount. In view of the said harassment, said Mahmooda Begum committed suicide on 10.08.2013 by way of h
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 part II IPC due to insufficient evidence of intent.
The accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt when witness testimonies are inconsistent and unreliable, leading to a lack of credible evidence for conviction.
The court modified the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, recognizing the act was committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel.
The court established that sudden provocation can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter, particularly in domestic disputes.
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.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the court cannot rely solely on moral conviction or suspicion. Corroborative evidence is essential to establish guilt.
The court considered the absence of premeditation or previous motive, the nature of the weapon used, and the amount of force employed to determine the accused's guilt.
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
