Conviction Altered from Section 304 Part II to Part I in Homicide Case: Bombay High Court
In a significant decision, the Bombay High Court delivered a landmark judgement altering the conviction of an appellant from Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to Section 304 Part I. The judgement was pronounced by a division bench comprising of Justices SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI and ABHAY S. WAGHWASE on August 31, 2023.
The case involved the appellant, Abbas @ Kalu Shah, who was convicted by the trial court for his role in a homicide case under Section 304 Part II of the IPC. The appellant had been sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment. Dissatisfied with the conviction, the appellant appealed against the judgement. Simultaneously, the State also filed an appeal, challenging the acquittal of other accused in the case.
The High Court meticulously analyzed the sequence of events leading up to the trial. It was revealed that there had been a previous quarrel between the appellant and the deceased. The incident took place when the appellant allegedly assaulted the deceased with a knife, resulting in the latter’s death. The medical evidence presented in the case supported the cause of death being attributed to stab injuries.
The central question before the High Court was whether the conviction under Section 304 Part II was justified. The court delved into the applicability of Section 304 Part I and Part II and examined the evidence and circumstances of the case. The court observed that while there was no premeditation or intention to kill, the circumstances indicated that the appellant had acted in a sudden fit of anger and passion.
“There is no premeditation or intention to kill. Circumstances for attracting Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC are shown to be existing. In the totality of the circumstances and the evidence, it is not a case falling under Section 304 Part II rather it falls under 304 Part I.”
As a result of its analysis, the High Court altered the conviction from Section 304 Part II to Section 304 Part I, which pertains to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The appellant had already undergone the sentence, and therefore, the sentence was considered as already served.
The judgement reaffirmed the principle that the mere status of witnesses being close relatives does not automatically deem their testimonies as unreliable. The court cited relevant legal precedents to support its decision. The ruling serves as a notable precedent in cases involving the applicability of different sections of the IPC based on the nature of the incident and the accused’s intentions.
Date of Decision: 31 AUGUST 2023
Mukundwadi, Aurangabad. vs The State of Maharashtra
