The court clarified the parameters for culpable homicide under Exception 4, Section 300 IPC, emphasizing the absence of premeditation.

1. Appellants have preferred the present appeal being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 29.11.2019 passed by the Learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Satna in ST No.205/2017 whereby appellants have been convicted for commission of offence under Section 302 /34 of the IPC and have been sentenced to imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.5,000/- and appellant No.1 Ashish Sondhiya has also been convicted under Section 323 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months along with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

2. As per the prosecution story, in the intervening night of 09.05.2017, rainy water was collected on the roof of house of complainant-Kiran (wife of deceased Santosh). On 10.05.2017 in the morning, she saw that her husband was trying to remove water from the roof and upon inserting a stick into drain pipe, it was not cleared then her husband came down and broke the pipe resultantly garbage came out. Immediately thereafter her sister-in-law (Jethani) Rekha came out from the house and asked as to why pipe has been broken and asked to remove the garbage but her husband Santosh refused. Thereupon son of Rekha, namely Ashish abused and assaulted with stick on her left leg. After sometime, her husband went on the roof, where Ashish and his father Ajay reached and assaulted the deceased with Lathi (stick) and he succumbed to the injuries. The incident was reported by his wife Kiran to the police whereupon Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P/12) and Marg Intimation
(Ex.P/2) was registered in the police station-City Kotwali, District Satna. Thereafter, case was registered under Sections 302 /34 at crime no.313/2017. After investigation, challan was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Satna, who after registration of the criminal case No.809/2017 committed the matter to the learned 9th Additional Sessisons Judge, Satna.

3. Learned Court framed the charges under Sections 302 /34 and 323 of the IPC against the accused persons, who abjured their guilt and contended that they have been falsely implicated in the offence.

4. The prosecution examined total 13 witnesses whereas the appellants/accused persons examined Vijay Sondhiya (DW-1) in defence. The appeal has already been admitted for final hearing on 21.01.2020 and in pursuance of the order dated 08.04.2022 passed by this Court, the matter was taken up for hearing on the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail (I.A.No.292/2021) and for final disposal. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have suffered a total sentence of about 5 years without remission, which from the record appears to be correct. In such circumstances, with the consent of the parties, the appeal was heard finally.

5. The finding of the learned Trial Court has been assailed on the ground that the rival parties are close relatives and only upon a minor dispute of collection of garbage, the incident took place in three parts. There was no motive of the accused persons to kill the deceased Santosh and the appellants/accused persons were not having any common intention and there are general allegations against both the appellants. Indisputably, the injuries are said to have been caused by using a Lathi (stick) and the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the case of the appellants falls within the exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC because all the injuries are abrasions and contusions. It is not clear from record that out of the two accused persons, who struck fatal blow to the deceased and at the m