SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 2056

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, JJ.
Mr. Dharavat Bhav Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana, Rep.By Its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.3162 Of 2018
Decided On : 15-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P Prabhakar Reddy
For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor (Tg)

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 II instead of Section 302.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 498A - Conviction for murder and cruelty - Accused sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and imprisonment for cruelty - Incident arose from domestic disputes and alcohol addiction, leading to the wife's death by injury caused in a quarrel - Evidence supports history of abuse and involvement of panchayats - Court found the act impulsive without premeditation, affirming the distinction between intention and knowledge as per Sections 299 and 304 - Conversion of charge from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder was upheld. (Paras 3, 12, 38, 47)

(B) Sentencing - Consideration of absence of premeditation and the context of the act - The court discussed the factors to decide guilt based on intention and knowledge, particularly in cases of domestic violence. (Paras 46, 47)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife after a history of alcohol-induced violence, where he caused fatal injuries during a quarrel. The conviction stemmed from a failed marriage and consistent harassment, supported by witness testimonies and investigations.

Findings of Court:
The court altered the conviction from murder (Section 302) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part II), imposing a sentence commensurate with the actual circumstances of the act.

Issues: The key legal issues revolved around the sustainability of the conviction for murder and the appropriate classification of the accused's actions under IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that while the accused's actions led to death, they lacked the necessary intent to qualify as murder under Section 302, illustrating nuances between intention and knowledge in homicide cases.

Result: Criminal appeal partly allowed; conviction altered to Section 304 Part II of IPC.

Table of Content
1. facts surrounding the case and the nature of the crime. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. arguments and contentions from both sides. (Para 10 , 11)
3. legal observations on the nature of violence and intent. (Para 12 , 13 , 35)
4. distinction between culpable homicide and murder. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 47)
5. importance of intent and knowledge in determining the charge. (Para 39 , 40)
6. court's final decision and sentencing. (Para 48)

JUDGMENT :

K. Lakshman, J.

1. Heard Mr. P. Prabhakar Reddy, 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 26.09.2018 in S.C. No.182 of 2018 passed by learned Judge, Family Court - cum - VI Additional Sessions Judge at Khammam.

3. Vide the aforesaid judgment, learned trial Court convicted the appellant - accused for the offences under Sections - 302 and 498A of IPC , and accordingly sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000 (Rupees One Thousand Only) and in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three (03) months for the offence under Section - 302 of . He was further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Two (02) Years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) for the offence under Section - 498A of and in default, to undergo imprisonment for a period of three (03) months.

4. It is a homicidal death of a house-wife by her husband. The case of the prosecution is that PW.1 is the brother of the deceased, while the appellant herein - accused is her husband. Twelve Years (12) ago from the date of incident, marriage of the deceased was performed with the appellant herein. They led the marital life happily for some period. Out of their wedlock, they were blessed with female and male child i.e., Priyanka and Prem respectively. The appellant herein addicted to alcohol and used to quarrel and harass the deceased, both mentally and physically without any reasons. The same was narrated to her maternal uncles, PWs.3 and 4, who in turn approached the village elders, LW.12 and PW.16, who conducted a panchayat and admonished the appellant to change his attitude towards the deceased and lead a normal life with her and children. The appellant did not change his attitude and continued his harassment towards the deceased. On 06.04.2018 at about 22:00 hours, while the deceased and the appellant herein were having meals, the appellant picked up quarrel with the deceased and beat her with a pestle on her forehead and caused injury. On hearing the cries of the deceased, PW.2 went and found her in a pool of blood with head injury. By that time, the appellant herein fled away with pestle from there. The same was informed to PW.1. PWs.3 and 4 came there and shifted the deceased to Government Hospital, Khammam for treatment at 10.30 PM by an Auto-rickshaw of PW.10. The duty doctor on examination of the deceased declared her brought dead.

5. On receipt of Ex.P1 - report given by PW.1, brother of the deceased on 07.04.2018 at 02000 hours, PW.20, Sub-Inspector of Police, Raghunadhapalem Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.67 of 2018 under Section - 302 of IPC and issued express FIR and handed over the same to PW.22, Inspector of Police, Singareni/In Charge of Khammam Rural Circle, for investigation. PW.22 accordingly took up investigation.

6. On completion of investigation, PW.22 filed a charge sheet against the appellant herein. The same was committed to the trial Court, which was taken on file as S.C. No.182 of 2018 for the offences under Sections - 302 and 498A of IPC .

7. The trial Court framed charges for the aforesaid offences against the accused and then proceeded with trial.

8. During trial, PWs.1 to 22 were examined, Exs.P1 to P17 were marked and MOs.1 to 6 were exhibited. No evidence either oral or documentary was let in on behalf of the accused.

9. After completion of evidence on behalf of the prosecut

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top