Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU, P.SAM KOSHY
Jabari Shankar – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments presented by the parties (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. court's observations regarding witness credibility (Para 14 , 19) |
| 4. legal interpretations related to culpable homicide (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. court's reasoning on intent and provocation (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. final judgment and sentence (Para 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
P. SAM KOSHY, J.
1. The instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973, has been filed by the appellant/accused No.1 assailing the judgment of conviction dated 16.04.2018 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Asifabad (for short the ‘Trial Court’) in S.C.No.169 of 2016.
2. Heard Mr. Chetluru Sreenivas, learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1 and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State.
3. Vide the impugned judgment, the Trial Court has found the appellant herein guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). Upon convicting the appellant, the Trial Court has sentenced the appellant to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs
The court established that sudden provocation can reduce a murder charge to culpable homicide under Section 304 if the act occurs without premeditation and in the heat of passion.
The court established that a lack of premeditation and intent to kill can lead to a conviction under Section 304 IPC instead of Section 302 IPC in cases of sudden provocation.
The court ruled that a stabbing occurring during a quarrel, influenced by mutual provocation and intoxication, merited a conviction under Section 304-I of the IPC instead of Section 302.
Exception IV to Section 300 IPC allows for culpable homicide not amounting to murder in cases of sudden fights or quarrels without premeditation or undue advantage.
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 court established that a lack of premeditation and intention to kill in a sudden quarrel can lead to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.
The court held that when a death occurs from a single blow in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, it may be classified under Section 304 IPC instead of 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
