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

KING v. CROOS et al.


King V. Croos Et Al.,

[COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.]

1945 present: Keuneman Wijeyewardene and
Jayetileke JJ.

THE KING v. CROOS et al.

1-M. C. Colombo, 27,483.

Court of Criminal Appeal-Verdict of culpable homicide not justified-Grave and sudden provocation-No common intention-Attempt to commi culpable homicide substituted in the case of 2nd accused.

The two accused were indicted for murder and convicted of culpable homicide. On the Judge's direction " If there was grave and sudden provocation, the offence would be culpable homicide not amounting to murder. If there was no grave and sudden provocation, it would be a case of murder itself " the Jury brought in a verdict of culpable homicide not amounting to murder against the 2nd accused.

There was no evidence that the injury inflicted by the 2nd accused, although it was intended to kill, endangered life or contributed to the death of the deceased

The death of the deceased had in fact been caused by an injury inflicted by the 1st accused between whom and the 2nd accused there was mo common intention established.

Held, that a verdict of " Guilty of an attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder

























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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top