IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, JJ.
Irigadindla Venkataiah S/o Sathaiah – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1406 of 2018
Decided On : 17-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details under section 302 ipc (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. arguments by appellant and prosecution (Para 11 , 12) |
| 3. consideration of the offence under section 302 ipc (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's observations on intent and knowledge (Para 38 , 39) |
| 5. distinction between culpable homicide and murder (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 6. final judgment and instruction on sentencing (Para 47 , 48) |
JUDGMENT :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashok Talla, learned counsel for appellant-accused and Dr. S. Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 13.03.2018 in S.C. No.150 of 2015 passed by learned I Additional Sessions Judge at Nalgonda.
3. Vide the aforesaid judgment, learned trial Court convicted the appellant-accused for the offence under Section-302 of IPC , and accordingly sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000 (Rupees Five Thousand Only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one (01) year.
4. It is a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. According to the prosecution, PW.1 is the son of deceased (Ramulu), while PW.3 is the wife of the deceased. The deceased and PW.2 are having an agricultural land at the outskirts of T. Gouraram Gate of Dindi Mandal, Nalgonda District of Telangana State. The accused herein is the agnate to the deceased. PW.6 and the accused jointly cultivated groundnut crop in the leased land of the deceased. For the purpose of watering to the said crop, they brought water pipes on rent basis. On 24.03.2013, PW.6 informed the deceased to return the said water pipes to the owner if he comes. Accordingly, the deceased returned the same. On the same day in the evening hours, the accused came to know that the deceased handed over the rented water pipes to its owner and kept the same in his mind. On the same day evening at about 6.00 P.M. at Ghat Road of Chinna Gouraram Village at the outskirts of T. Gouraram Gate Village, the accused keeping the same in mind quarreled with the deceased and entered into tussle. In the meanwhile, the wife of the deceased, who was proceeding towards her agricultural fields in search of deceased, saw the said tussle and made hue and cries. On noticing the wife of deceased (PW.3), the accused sprinkled the soil into the eyes of the deceased and beat him with a stone on back of head and below the right eye region by making him to fell on the ground. Then, the wife of the deceased made hues and cries, and on hearing the same, PW.2, who was proceeding through the road on bicycle, rushed to the spot and both of them shifted the deceased to their house. Thereafter, on 26.03.2013 PW.2 took the injured/deceased to Area Hospital, Devarkonda, with the help of PWs.4 and 5 for treatment, where the doctor examined the injured and referred him to Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad, for better treatment. On that, the injured was shifted to Gandhi Hospital and got admitted.
5. On 30.03.2013 at 2.00 P.M., the son of the deceased (PW.2) gave Ex.P1 - Telugu written report with the Police of Dindi Police Station, who in turn registered a case in Crime No.24 of 2013 under Section - 324 of IPC and took up investigation by PW.11 - Sub-Inspector of Police.
6. While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries on 31.03.2013 at about 10.15 P.M. Having come to know the same on 01.04.2013 at 6.00 A.M. through PW.1, the police altered the section of law to 304 of IPC . Since the offence is grave in nature, PW.12 took up the case from PW.11 for investigation.
7. PW.15 after examining the witnesses and recording their statements and conducting investigation by following due procedure, laid charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section - 302 of IPC . The same was committed to the trial Court and the same was taken on file as S.C. No.150 of 2015 for the offence under Section - 302 of .
8. The trial Court framed cha
The court reclassified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC due to lack of intent and motive.
The court distinguished between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder, ruling that the accused acted impulsively without premeditation, warranting a conviction under Section 304 Part I....
(1) Intention of a person cannot be proved by direct evidence but is to be deduced from the facts and circumstances of a case – ‘Intent’ and ‘knowledge’ cannot be equated with each other – They conno....
In Exception 4-culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without offender having taken undue advantage or....
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.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, highlighting that the accused acted with sufficient intent, despite claims of provocation, based on consistent eyewitness testimoni....
Unintentional homicide is not murder under Section 302 of IPC.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.