1983 JTR(SC) 46
1983 AIR(SC) 361 ; 1983 CriLR 174 ; 1983 1 Crimes(SC) 728 ; 1983 CrLJ 693 ; 1983 MLJ(Cri) 465 ; 1983 1 Scale 702 ; 1983 1 Scale 871 ; 1984 Supp SCC 648 ; 1983 SCC(Cri) 535 ; 1983 KHC 572
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI AND O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, JJ.
Vasanta, Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 515 of 1976, D/- 2-2-1983.
Advocates appeared
Mr. U. R. Lalit, Sr. Advocate, Mr. P. H. Parekh and Mr. D. K. Chhaya, Advocate for Appellant; Mr. M. N. Shroff and Mr. V. N. Ganpule, Advocates for Respondent.
.
Act Referred :INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.302, S.304
(A) The Indian Penal Code sections 302 and 304 Part 2 are applied to assess culpable homicide not amounting to murder versus murder. Section 302 governs intentional killing with clear premeditation, while Section 304 Part 2 addresses rash or negligent killing under grave and sudden provocation. The medical evidence of severe, cruel injury inflicted with great force indicated an absence of such provocation, leading to the application of Section 302.
(B) Key principles include the necessity to distinguish between murder and culpable homicide based on the nature of provocation, intent, and cruelty of the act. The severity and manner of the injury are determinative in classifying the offense.
Facts of the case:
A verbal altercation escalated where the accused assaulted the deceased with a knife using great force, resulting in fatal chest injuries including a fractured rib and damage to the heart and lung.
Findings of Court:
The court found the injury to be extremely severe and cruel, negating any claim of grave and sudden provocation, thereby classifying the act as murder under Section 302 rather than culpable homicide under Section 304 Part 2.
Issues:
The primary issue was determining whether the offense constituted murder under Section 302 or culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part 2.
Ratio Decidendi:
The court determined that the cruelty and intent of the act, evidenced by the fatal chest injury inflicted with great force, squarely placed the case within Section 302, rejecting the argument for Section 304 Part 2.
Result:
The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction under Section 302 was affirmed.
(A) The Indian Penal Code sections 302 and 304 Part 2 are applied to assess culpable homicide not amounting to murder versus murder. Section 302 governs intentional killing with clear premeditation, while Section 304 Part 2 addresses rash or negligent killing under grave and sudden provocation. The medical evidence of severe, cruel injury inflicted with great force indicated an absence of such provocation, leading to the application of Section 302.
(B) Key principles include the necessity to distinguish between murder and culpable homicide based on the nature of provocation, intent, and cruelty of the act. The severity and manner of the injury are determinative in classifying the offense.
Facts of the case:
A verbal altercation escalated where the accused assaulted the deceased with a knife using great force, resulting in fatal chest injuries including a fractured rib and damage to the heart and lung.
Findings of Court:
The court found the injury to be extremely severe and cruel, negating any claim of grave and sudden provocation, thereby classifying the act as murder under Section 302 rather than culpable homicide under Section 304 Part 2.
Issues:
The primary issue was determining whether the offense constituted murder under Section 302 or culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part 2.
Ratio Decidendi:
The court determined that the cruelty and intent of the act, evidenced by the fatal chest injury inflicted with great force, squarely placed the case within Section 302, rejecting the argument for Section 304 Part 2.
Result:
The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction under Section 302 was affirmed.
D.K.CHHAYA, M.N.SHROFF, P.H.Parekh, U.U.Lalit, V.N.GANPULE
JUDGMENT :- The appellant in the first instance was convicted by the trial Court under S. 304, Part 2, I. P. C. and sentenced to imprisonment for five years rigorous imprisonment. In the High Court appeals were filed both by the accused-appellant as also by the State. The High Court dismissed the appeal of the accused but allowed the appeal filed by the State and altered the conviction of the appellant from one under Sec. 304, Part 2, I. P. C. to that under S. 302, I. P. C. and sentenced the appellant to imprisonment for life. Hence this appeal before us. The facts have been narrated in the judgment of the High Court and it is not necessary to repeat the same. It appears that there was some verbal altercation as a result of which the deceased had caught the hand of the accused, whereupon the accused assaulted the deceased with a knife with very great force according to medical evidence. In view of the medical evidence and injuries received by the deceased the case squarely falls within four corners of S. 302, I. P. C. Mr. Lalit, however, submits that the case falls under Section 304, Part 2, I. P. C. in view of serious altercations between the parties as held by the trial Court. We are, however, unable to agree with this contention because there is nothing to show that the altercation was of such a serious nature which could cause sudden provocation. Secondly, the nature of injury, namely, the stab on the chest which resulted in the fracture of the 6th rib and injured the heart and the lung and which according to the doctor was given with great force showed that it was most cruel and therefore the case squarely falls under S. 302, I. P. C. We are in complete agreement with the High Court that the offence falls under Sec. 302, I. P. C. and the appellant was therefore, rightly convicted by the High Court. The accused, who is now on bail will be taken into custody to serve the remaining part of the sentence. There is no merit in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
For Citation : AIR 1983 SC 361(1)