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

2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 32894

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V &

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH TH WEDNESDAY, THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 17TH ASWINA, 1946 CRL.A NO.1213 OF 2017 CRIME NO.603/2014 OF TANUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.11.2017 IN SC NO.396 OF 2015 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - III, MANJERI ARISING OUT OF CP NO.91 OF 2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT-I, PARAPPANANGADI APPELLANTS/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:

1 SAIDU MUHAMMED, S/O YAHOO, ARANKATHIL HOUSE, PATHAMBAD, MOOCHIKAL, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM - 676109

2 UMMER FAROOQUE @ KUNHU, S/O MUHAMMED KUTTY, ARANKATHIL HOUSE, PATHAMBAD, MOOCHIKAL, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM - 676109 BY ADVS.

SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON ; SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:

1 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE CIRCLE, TANUR, MALAPPURAM - 676302

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN.682031 ADV.SMT.NEEMA.T.V., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 09.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Advocates:
SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON ; SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI, ADV.SMT.NEEMA.T.V., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The court established that an act committed in a sudden fight without premeditation can be classified as culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC, rather than murder under Section 302 IPC.

Headnote:

Criminal Law - Murder - IPC Sections 302, 304, 323, 448 - The court interpreted the definitions of murder and culpable homicide, applying Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, concluding that the act was committed in a sudden fight without premeditation, leading to a conviction under Section 304 instead of 302.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted for the murder of a migrant worker after a physical altercation stemming from noise complaints. The deceased was thrown from a terrace, resulting in fatal injuries.

Issues: Whether the actions of the appellants constituted murder under Section 302 IPC or culpable homicide under Section 304 IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the act was committed in the heat of passion during a sudden quarrel, qualifying for Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, thus reducing the charge from murder to culpable homicide.

Final Decision: The appeal was partially allowed; the conviction under Section 302 IPC was set aside, and the appellants were convicted under Section 304 IPC with a sentence of 10 years.

JUDGEMENT

G.Girish, J.

The judgment dated 30.11.2017 of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Manjeri convicting and sentencing the appellants under Sections 448 , 323 and 302 I.P.C, is under challenge in this appeal. As per the above judgment, the appellants, who were accused Nos.1 and 2 were sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 302 of the IPC , simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs.1,000/- each under Section 323 of the and simple imprisonment for one month and fine of Rs.1,000/- each under Section 448 of the .

2.The prosecution case is summarized as follows: The deceased Dakshinamoorthy @ Chinnayya and PW1, PW2, PW3 and CW4 were migrant workers from the State of Tamilnadu who came to the place called Moochikkal in Malappuram District for the purpose of employment. They were residing on the 3 rd floor of a building called Ayyappalli Towers in connection with their employment. The appellants and the 3rd accused, who were tippling in a vacant land along with PW12, at about 10.20 pm, on 15.04.2014, did not relish the deceased and other migrant laborers from Tamilnadu talking aloud from the open terrace of the above said building. Thereupon appellants 1 and 2, followed by the 3 rd accused, criminally trespassed into the open terrace of the building by name Ayyappally Towers and slapped the deceased and his friends. When the deceased questioned the above act of the appellants, they, with the intention of causing the death of the above person by name Dakshinamoorthy @ Chinnayya, lifted him by holding his hands and legs, and flung him down to the ground floor of the building leading to fatal head injuries. Though the victim was taken to hospital and rendered medical aid, he succumbed to the injuries on 21.04.2014. Thus, the appellants along with the 3 rd accused committed the offence punishable under Sections 449 , 323 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC .

3.PW1, an eye witness to the incident, tendered Ext.P1 First Information Statement to the Station House Officer of Tanur Police Station at 3.10 pm on 16.04.2014. The above statement was recorded with the help of an interpreter and Ext.P8 FIR was registered by PW15, the Station House Officer in charge of that Police Station, under Sections 307, and 323 IPC read with section 34 . Thereafter, PW16, the Inspector of Police, Tanur took over the investigation on 17.04.2014 and initiated the usual procedures, as required by law. PW16 visited the scene of crime and prepared Exts.P3 and P9 scene mahazars and took MO1 to MO7 material objects into custody. The Investigating Officer also availed the assistance of the Scientific Assistant attached to the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory for taking the samples of material objects from the scene of crime. He moved the necessary applications before the Jurisdictional Magistrate for forwarding the samples collected for scientific analysis.In the meanwhile, the victim succumbed to the injuries on 21.04.2024. The inquest and autopsy of the body of the deceased were promptly done. Accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested on 24.04.2014 and remanded to judicial custody. At the request of the Investigating Officer a test identification parade of the accused was conducted on 07.05.2014 by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Ponnanni. In the above test identification parade, PW2 identified accused Nos.1 to 3. After the completion of the investigation, PW20, the Inspector of Police, Tanur laid the Final Report before the learned Magistrate.

4.Upon commitment of the case, the Court of Sessions, Manjeri, after securing the presence of the accused, proceeded with the preliminary hearing and framed charges against the accused under Sections 449, 323 and 302 of the IPC r/w Section 34 of the . Thereafter the case was made over to Additional Sessions Judge - III, Manjeri for trial. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses as PW1 to PW20 and marked 26 documents as Exts.P1 to P26.

Seven material objects were identi

                                  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