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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8819

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Vedprakash Golu Dhruw – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 83 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mohit Kumar
For the Respondents: Nitansh Jaiswal

An offence committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, without prior premeditation or cruel conduct by the assailant, constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, rather than murder punishable under Section 302 IPC.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 300, Exception 4 - Culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Alteration of conviction - Incident occurred following sudden quarrel and refusal of request for water - No premeditation - Act committed in heat of passion - Appellant did not act in a cruel or unusual manner - Conviction under Section 302 IPC altered to Section 304 Part-I IPC. (Paras 17, 24, 25 and 26)

Facts of the case:
The appellant went to the house of the deceased at night asking for water. Upon being refused and rebuked, he assaulted the deceased with a tangiya (axe-like weapon), causing fatal head injuries. The trial court convicted the appellant for murder under Section 302 IPC. The appeal challenges this, contending the act was unpremeditated and occurred during a sudden heat of passion, citing Section 300 Exception 4.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the evidence clearly established the appellant's involvement in the homicidal death of the deceased. However, acknowledging that the incident lacked prior meeting of minds or premeditation and occurred during a spontaneous quarrel, the court applied Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. Consequently, it altered the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-I IPC, sentencing the appellant to 10 years rigorous imprisonment.

Issues: Whether the appellant's act falls under the exception relating to sudden fights and lack of premeditation, warranting a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder rather than murder.

Ratio Decidendi: If an incident arises from a sudden quarrel without premeditation and the offender does not act in a cruel or unusual manner, the offense falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, qualifying as culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Result: Appeal partly allowed; conviction altered to Section 304 Part-I IPC.

Table of Content
1. procedural history and factual summary of the murder trial. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. contentions regarding the applicability of section 302 versus 304 part-i ipc. (Para 7 , 8)
3. courts evaluation of evidence and establishment of appellant's involvement. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. analysis of legal precedents for exception 4 of section 300. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
5. final ruling converting conviction to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)

Judgement on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

1. Present is a criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.12.2023 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No. 30/2023, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him in the following manner:

Conviction Sentence
U/s. 302 of IPC R.I. for Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine further three months R.I.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on the intervening night of 12.02.2023 and 13.02.2023 at about 11:30 PM, when the appellant went to the house of the deceased Lalita Thakur and asked for water, the deceased refused to give water and rebuked him, on which the appellant, in a fit of anger, assaulted her by means of a tangiya, causing injuries on her head. Hearing the cries, nearby persons gathered and the deceased was found in an injured and unconscious condition. She was immediately taken to Community Health Centre, Bagbahara and thereafter referred to Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur for further treatment. During the course of treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on 17.02.2023. Intimation regarding the incident was given to the police by eyewitness Narendra Diwan, upon which merg intimation was recorded and thereafter the matter was registered and investigated.

3. The inquest (Exhibit P-3) was prepared by the police in the presence of witnesses, and the dead body of the deceased Lalita Thakur was sent for postmortem to Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur, where PW-12/Dr. Nagendra Singh Sonwani conducted the postmortem and issued report (Exhibit P-11). During postmortem, the doctor noticed multiple stitched wounds over the head, including a “C”-shaped sutured wound of 28 cm on the left side of the scalp, another sutured wound of 9 cm on the right temporal region, along with surgical intervention marks. On internal examination, fractures of skull bones, extradural haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, and subarachnoid haemorrhage were found in different regions of the brain, and the brain was swollen and congested. The doctor opined that the cause of death was head injury caused by hard and blunt object, resulting in haemorrhage, and the death was homicidal in nature.

The merg intimation (Exhibit P-2) was recorded on the basis of information given by eyewitness Narendra Diwan, and thereafter FIR was registered for the offence under Section 307 IPC, which was later converted into Section 302 IPC after the death of the deceased. The spot map (Exhibit P-3) and Patwari map (Exhibit P-5) were prepared. During the investigation, memorandum statement of the accused (Exhibit P-7) was recorded, pursuant to which one iron tangiya, blood-stained jacket and jeans were seized vide seizure memo (Exhibit P-8). Blood-stained articles, including stone pieces from the spot and a blood-stained cloth, were also seized (Exhibits P-4 and P-10). The seized articles were sent for FSL examination, and as per the FSL report (Exhibit P-34), human blood was detected on the tangiya, clothes of the accused and other seized articles. Statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the

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