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

2016 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 49

CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Mr. N.K. Chandravanshi, J
Radheshyam – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1129 of 1999 | Criminal Appeal No. 1397 of 1999



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: [Names not included]
For the Respondents: [Names not included]

Modifying conviction from murder to manslaughter due to lack of intent and premeditation, establishing a precedent for considering trivial disputes in assessing culpability.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Criminal procedure - Conviction of appellants for life imprisonment under IPC for the murder of a deceased after a quarrel arises from a trivial dispute. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish individual overt acts of the appellants leading to the conclusion that the death resulted from accidental injuries while they were involved in a tussle over a minor issue. The court modified the conviction from S.302 to S.304 Part II due to lack of premeditation and intent to kill, ruling that the death was caused by injuries that occurred incidentally in the fight rather than as a direct result of assault. (Paras 21-23)

Table of Content
1. x x x (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 21 , 22 , 23)

1. These two Criminal Appeals arise out of a judgment of conviction dated 15-4-1999 under S.302, IPC for life imprisonment, passed by the Special Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No. 346 of 1991.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 8-7-1991 at around 7 a.m. complainant Kala Bai (PW - 12) was working in the dairy of Appellant Radheshyam, had a quarrel with another worker i.e. Appellant Santu Yadav of the same dairy. As per the prosecution, after the quarrel, complainant Kala Bai went home and informed her husband Ganpat (the deceased) and daughter Ganesiya Bai (PW - 14). Thereafter, the complainant along with her husband and daughter reached the dairy where it is said that the accused persons assaulted the complainant and her husband Ganpat with fists, blows, kicks, lathi and iron rod. In the process, husband of the complainant received grievous injuries leading to his death. The complainant and her daughter are said to have taken the body of the deceased immediately to the hospital where he was declared to have been brought dead. Accordingly, Dehati Nalishi was lodged at around 7.30 a.m. on the same day based upon which the Police registered an FIR in Crime No. 580/91 for the offence under S.302/34, IPC . The body of the deceased was sent for post - mortem which was conducted on the same day by Dr. D. C. Jain (PW - 6) vide Ex. P - 6 and in the course of post - mortem the doctor found following injuries on the body of the deceased :
i) Contusion 4\" x 1\" right forearm mid portion
ii) Contusion 4\" x 1\" left forearm mid part
iii) Contusion 3\" x 2\" left frontal parietal region
iv) Contusion 2\" x 1\" mid frontal region scalp
v) Contusion 6\" x 1\" chest mid

3. In addition to the above injuries, it was found that the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th left ribs of the deceased had fractured on account of which the heart got ruptured causing the death. The doctor opined that the cause of death was syncope due to rupture of heart and the nature of death was homicidal.

4. After investigation, the matter was put to trial before the Special Judge, Raipur. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and there was no witness on behalf of the defence. In all seven persons were prosecuted out of which four persons namely Rakesh Tiwari, Munna alias Rajesh, Raju alias Sunil and Lalita w/o appellant Santu were acquitted, however the present appellants Radheshyam and Virendra Kumar Tiwari in Criminal Appeal No. 1129/99 and appellant Santu in Criminal Appeal No. 1397/99 were convicted for the offence under S.302, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

5. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the finding of the trial Court is totally perverse and contrary to the evidence on record. It was contended that none of the prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution independently establishing the charges levelled against them yet the trial Court has found the charges to have been proved leading to perversity. It was contended that the deceased in fact had not died because of the alleged assault made by the appellants rather it is a case where the deceased himself having fallen down received injuries on his ribs leading to his death which stands established from the evidence which has come before the Court particularly the evidence of PW - 12 the widow and PW - 14 the daughter of the deceased and the evidence of PW - 6, the doctor who supports the fact that the injuries to the ribs leading to death could also happen by fall. It was argued that the appellants never had any enmity with the deceased and that the entire case of the prosecution even if taken into consideration would establish that there was no such occasion which had arisen by which the appellants or for that matter all the accused person would get together to assault the deceased with an intention of eliminating him. The alleged prosecution story itself would reveal that there was only a trivi

























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