The court clarified that for Exception 1 of Section 300 IPC to apply, provocation must be both grave and sudden, leading to a temporary loss of self-control.

ORDER :

1. This appeal arises from the Judgment and Order passed by the High Court of Madras dated 27-6-2019 in Criminal Appeal No.194/2012 by which the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant – herein and thereby affirmed the Judgment and Order passed by the Trial Court, i.e., Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam holding the appellant – herein guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304 Part 1 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter, referred to as “IPC”) and sentencing him to undergo 5 years of rigorous imprisonment. It appears that the appellant was also held guilty of the offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC and was sentenced to undergo 2 years of rigorous imprisonment.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:-

3. The appellant – herein along with his friends including `PW 11’ and `PW 12’ had gone to watch a movie on 5-11-2007. They were returning home in the mid night hours after watching the movie. While they were sleeping beneath a bridge, they found the deceased over there to be in an inebriated condition. It seems that the deceased was heavily drunk. The deceased picked up an altercation with the appellant – herein and his friends. According to the prosecution, at that point of time, the appellant picked up a cement brick which was lying at the place of occurrence and hit the deceased on his head. The deceased succumbed to the head injuries.

4. It is also the case of the prosecution that thereafter with a view to destroy the evidence, the appellant – herein set the dead-body of the deceased on fire.

5. The `PW 1’ in his capacity as the Village Administrative Officer lodged a First Information Report in this regard at the concerned Police Station.

6. The inquest panchnama of the dead-body was carried out.

Thereafter, the dead-body was sent for postmortem. The Postmortem Report reveals that the cause of death was due to head injuries.

7. At the end of the investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet. The case came to be committed to the Court of Sessions under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereafter, referred to as “Code”).

8. The Trial Court framed charge against the appellant – herein for the offence enumerated above to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

9. In the course of the trial, the prosecution examined the following witnesses:-

P.W.1. Thiru Mohan, Village Administrative Officer

P.W.2 Tmt Rani

P.W.3 Tmt Vanitha

P.W.4 Tmt Kavitha

P.W.5 Dr M.S. Kadar

P.W.6 Tmt Gayathri, Scientific Assistant

P.W.7 Thiru Mohandoss

P.W.8 Thiru Srinivasan

P.W.9 Thiru Samarasapandiyan, Head Constable

P.W.10 Thiru Rajasekar, Inspector of Police

P.W.11 Thiru Ramu

P.W.12 Tmt Raji

10. The prosecution also relied upon the following pieces of documentary evidence:-

Ex.P.1 06.11.2007 Complaint given by Village Administrative Officer.

Ex.P.2 12.11.2007 Signature of P.W.1 in Statement of Accused.

Ex.P.3 12.11.2007 Signature of report by Village Administrative Officer.

Ex.P.4 28.11.2007 Viscera Report.

Ex.P.5 06.11.2007 Post Mortem Certificate.

Ex.P.6 06.11.2007 Signature of P.W.7 in Observation Mahazar. Ex.P.7 06.11.2007 Signature of P.W.7 in Mahazar.

Ex.P.8 06.11.2007 Signature of P.W.8 in Observation Mahazar. Ex.P.9 06.11.2007 Signature of P.W.9 in Mahazar.

Ex.P.10 06.11.2007 Printed F.I.R.

Ex.P.11 06.11.2007 Observation Mahazar

Ex.P.12 06.11.2007 Rough Sketch.

?X.?.13 06.11.2007 Mahazar.

Ex.P.14 06.11.2007 Inquest Report.

EX.P.15 06.11.2007 Special report for recovery of M.0.8.

Ex.P.16 12.11.2007 Accused Statement by Village Administrative

Ex.P.17 12.11.2007 V.A.O. report.

Ex. P.18 12.11.2007 Admissible Portion in Confession Statement

Ex.P.19 12.11.2007 Mahazar for recovery of M.O.1,2 and 9. Ex.P.20 12.11.2007 Alteration Report.

Ex.P.21 13.11.2007 Requisition for Chemical Examination Ex.P.22 14.11.2007 Court Letter for Chemical Examination. Ex.P.23 28.11.2007 Biology Report.

Ex.P.24 28.02.2008 Serology Report

11. On conclusion of the recording of the oral evidence, the further statement of the appellant – herein