Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 18152

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rajani Dubey, Amitendra Kishore Prasad, JJ
Jeevan Patre – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ACQA No. 447 of 2019 | CRA No. 903 of 2019

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kumaresh Tiwari, Dhirendra Prasad Mishra
For the Respondents: Sangharsh Pandey, Vijay Mishra, Arvind Sinha

When a death is caused during a sudden quarrel without premeditation and in a heat of passion, where the accused had knowledge that death was a likely result but lacked specific intent to kill, the offense is punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the Penal Code rather than Section 302.

Headnote:(A) Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 304(II), and 34 - Exception 4 to Section 300 - Prosecution for murder - Conviction under S. 302 of IPC challenged - Occurrence arose from a sudden quarrel - No premeditation - Act done in heat of passion - Absence of intent to kill but presence of knowledge of fatality - Conviction altered to S. 304 Part II.

(B) Appeal against acquittal - Appellate Court’s scope - Double presumption of innocence - Interference warranted only if trial court’s view is perverse or illegal - Held, acquittal of co-accused affirmed as no common intention established.

Facts of the case:
The appellant, Shani Pahadi, engaged in a quarrel with the deceased, who then poured kerosene on herself. The appellant ignited a matchstick, resulting in fatal burns. The trial court convicted the appellant for murder but acquitted co-accused persons.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that the incident lacked premeditation and occurred in the heat of passion, bringing the case under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. The appellant’s conviction was altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (S. 304 Part II), and the acquittal of the co-accused was upheld.

Issues: Whether the appellant’s actions constituted murder under S. 302 or culpable homicide under S. 304 Part II, and whether the acquittal of the co-accused was sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: When death occurs during a sudden quarrel without premeditation and the offender had no intention to kill but possessed the knowledge that the act was likely to cause death, the offense falls under S. 304 Part II of the IPC rather than S. 302.

Result: Criminal appeal (CRA 903/2019) partly allowed; acquittal appeal (ACQA 447/2019) dismissed.

Table of Content
1. overview of charges, procedural history including fir, investigation, and lower court findings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. arguments regarding conviction validity, dying declaration discrepancies, and the maintainability of acquittal. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. legal analysis of exception 4 to section 300 ipc, sudden provocation, and lack of intent. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
4. conviction alteration from section 302 to section 304 part ii and sentencing determination. (Para 29 , 30)
5. affirmation of acquittal as a reasonable view; dismissal of the father's appeal. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37)

Per Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.

1. CRA No.903/2019:- This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant/accused person herein under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.10.2018 passed in Sessions Case No.113/2017 by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, C.G., whereby the appellant-Shanee (Shani) Pahadi has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Conviction	Sentence
U/s. 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’)	Rigorous Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine amount to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. ACQA No.447/2019:- This acquittal appeal preferred by the Appellant- Jeevan Patre arises out of the same judgment dated 30.10.2018 passed in Sessions Case No.113/2017 by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, C.G., whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused persons / respondent No.2- Ravi @ Vikas Pahadi & respondent No.3- Durga Pahadi herein of the charge under Sections 302/34 of IPC.

3. It is pertinent to mention that, during the pendency of this appeal, respondent No. 2 – Ravi @ Vikas Pahadi died on 08.10.2021, and the death certificate has been placed on record. Consequently, the acquittal appeal, insofar as it concerns respondent No. 2 – Ravi @ Vikas Pahadi, stands abated.

4. Since both the above captioned appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment dated 30.10.2018, they are being heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

5. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.06.2017 at about 6:00 PM, the three accused—Shani Pahadi (accused in CRA No. 903/2021), Durga Pahadi, and Ravi Pahadi (accused in ACQA No. 447/2019)—allegedly confronted the deceased, Rinki Patre, at her residence. It is alleged that when Durga Pahadi enquired about the presence of Rinki’s father and was informed that he was not at home, she became enraged, whereupon all three accused abused the deceased in filthy language and assaulted her. Thereafter, Rinki Patre/deceased went inside the house, poured kerosene on herself, and returned outside, stating that if the accused intended to kill her, they should do so. At this juncture, accused- Shani Pahadi allegedly stated, ‘If you are so eager to die, I will kill you today,’ and immediately set her ablaze by lighting a matchstick.

6. On the basis of the information given by the deceased/complainant- Kumari Rinki Patre, a Dehati Nalsi vide Ex.P-12 was initially registered at Tarbahar Police Station, and a zero numbered First Information Report vide Ex.P-13 was recorded against the accused persons for the offence under Section 307/34 IPC. Thereafter, a numbered FIR vide Ex.P-11 was subsequently registered at Chakarbhatha, Police Station. During the course of investigation conducted by Tarbahar Police Station, an application vide Ex.P-32 was submitted to the District Magistrate, Bilaspur, seeking permission to record the dying declaration of the deceased- Kumari Rinki Patre. Upon receiving permission, the Executive Magistrate, Bilaspur, recorded the dying declaration of the deceased vide Ex.P-22. While undergoing treatment, the deceased- Kumari Rinki Patre succumbed to her injuries on 22.06.2017. Consequently,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 18152

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRajani Dubey, Amitendra Kishore Prasad, JJJeevan Patre – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentACQA No. 447 of 2019 | CRA No. 903 of 2019

When a death is caused during a sudden quarrel without premeditation and in a heat of passion, where the accused had knowledge that death was a likely result but lacked specific intent to kill, the offense is punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the Penal Code rather than Section 302.

Cases Referred (3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rajani Dubey, Amitendra Kishore Prasad, JJ
Jeevan Patre – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ACQA No. 447 of 2019 | CRA No. 903 of 2019