Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14375
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Balsingh Nuruti – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 2390 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vivek Kumar Shrivastava
For the Respondents: Shailendra Sharma
When a homicide occurs during a sudden quarrel without premeditation, in a heat of passion, and without obtaining undue advantage, the offence falls under Exception 4 to Section 300. Where guilty knowledge is present but guilty intent to kill is absent, the conviction shall be for culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 325 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 103(1) and 117(2) - Culpable homicide not amounting to murder - Exception 4 of Section 300 IRC - Alteration of conviction - Incident occurred during sudden quarrel over property dispute without premeditation - Accused acted in heat of passion - Absence of intent to kill despite usage of weapon and assault on vital part - Conviction under Section 302 altered to Section 304 Part II. (Paras 17, 26, 28, 29, 32)
(B) Criminal Trial - Appreciation of evidence - Interested witness - Injured witness - Testimony of injured witness held credible - Presence of marks of injury on witness confirms involvement in incident - Mere family relation does not render witness 'interested' to the point of disqualification. (Paras 13, 15)
(C) Forensic Science - Evidence - FSL report confirming presence of human blood on recovered weapon and clothing - Absence of blood group matching does not negate forensic link in corroboration with ocular testimony. (Paras 14, 30)
Facts of the case:
An appeal was filed against the judgment of conviction for murder and causing grievous hurt. The prosecution alleged that the appellant assaulted his mother and brother following a domestic property dispute. The victim died due to head injuries, and the witness sustained grievous injuries. The trial court convicted the appellant for murder and causing grievous hurt, leading to the current appeal challenging the severity of the conviction and sentence, requesting a conversion to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that while the occurrence was established, the evidence suggested the absence of premeditation or specific intent to kill. The incident stemmed from a sudden family altercation. Applying the ingredients of Exception 4 to Section 300, the court concluded that the act resulted from a sudden fight in the heat of passion without undue advantage, thus warranting a modification of the conviction.
Issues: Whether the act of the accused constitutes murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and whether the conviction under the IPC should be modified based on the surrounding circumstances of the incident.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an incident occurs in a sudden fight over a property altercation without premeditation, in the heat of passion, and without the offender taking undue advantage, the act falls under Exception 4 of Section 300. In such cases, if the evidence demonstrates 'guilty knowledge' rather than 'guilty intention' to cause death, the conviction should be altered to Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
Result: Appeal partly allowed; conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside and substituted with Section 304 Part II IPC with a modified sentence of 7 years RI.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and procedural history of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. contentions regarding evidence sufficiency and applicability of culpable homicide. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. assessment of evidence and proof of the appellant's involvement. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. legal criteria distinguishing murder from culpable homicide. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. application of exception 4 to section 300 ipc. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
Judgment on Board
Per Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Heard Shri Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Shri Shailendera Sharma, PL, appearing for the State.
1. Present appeal has been listed for consideration on IA No.2 of 2025 application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. However, considering the fact that appellant is in jail since 28.12.2019, with the consent of the parties, matter is heard finally.
2. Present appeal under section 415 (2) of the BNS 2023 filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Banupratappur, District-North Bastar, Kanker in Session Trial-15 of 2020 whereby appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner with default stipulation:
| Conviction | Sentence |
|---|---|
| Under Section 325 of the IPC {Section 117(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023} | RI for three years, and to pay fine of Rs.500/- |
| Under Section 302 of the IPC {Section 103(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023} | Life imprisonment, and to pay fine of Rs.500/- |
3. Prosecution case in brief is that on 27.12.2019, complainant-Balram Nuruti, PW1, lodged dehati merg intimation Ex.P2 informing that in the evening of the day before, he came back to his fields from the market, he saw his mother lying in the field in pool of blood. When he asked from his younger brother Baldev Nuruti PW2, he disclosed that there was a quarrel between the appellant Balsingh Nuruti and the deceased Jugteenbai, and the appellant assaulted the deceased by danda. The incident was intervened by Baldev Nuruti and he too was assaulted by the appellant. He took his mother to the hospital where she was declared dead. Based on the dehati merg intimation, dehati nalishi Ex.P1 was also recorded by the police. Inquest of the dead body Ex.P7 was prepared by the police in presence of the witnesses and the dead-body was sent to the community health centre, Antagarh, where PW9 Dr.Sheetal Dugga conducted postmortem of dead body of the deceased and found the injury on right frontal region, left mandible region and found fracture of manubrium and clavicle bone. Doctor has opined that cause of death was head injury and nature of death was homicidal and gave postmortem report Ex.P8. Injured Baldev Nuruti was also sent for medical examination to the Community Health Centre, Antagarh, where he too was examined by PW9 Dr.Sheetal Dugga. While medically examining the injured Baldev Nuruti, doctor noticed one tear on frontal part of the head with swelling on right hand wrist joint and gave his report Ex.P16. He advised for X-ray of right wrist joint. After examining the X-ray report, he found fracture of Alna Bone of right wrist which was grievous in nature. Spot map Ex.P3 was prepared by the police, Blood stained and plain soil and one part of the danda was seized from the spot vide seizure memo Ex.P13. Sport map Ex.P4 was prepared by the Patwari. Merg intimation Ex.P18 was recorded at police station Sixole and then FIR Ex.P19 was registered against the appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC. Appellant was taken into custody on 28.12.2019 and his memorandum statement Ex.P11 was recorded. Based on his memorandum statement, the Bamboo Club in two pieces, T-shirt, and half pant of the appellant have been seized from him vide seizure memo Ex.P.12. Pieces of bamboo club were sent for their query report to the doc
