Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

"Conviction Altered from Section 302 to 304 Part II IPC: Supreme Court Rules 'Single Assault Without Premeditation Not Sufficient to Infer Intention to Kill'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India, presided over by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar, altered the conviction of the appellant from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC. The Court observed that a "single assault by the appellant coupled with the duration of the entire period having occurred for about 2-3 minutes would not be sufficient to infer that he had the intention to kill the deceased."

The appellant, N. Ramkumar, had appealed against the judgment of the Madurai bench of Madras High Court, which had upheld his conviction under Sections 450 & 302 IPC. The case revolved around a love affair gone awry, leading to the death of the deceased, Sangeetha.

Supreme Court meticulously examined the evidence, including medical reports and witness testimonies, before arriving at its decision. "The post-mortem report indicated that the deceased died due to a head injury," the judgment read. The Court also considered the testimonies of the deceased's mother and a neighbor, who had witnessed the events leading to the tragic incident.

In its legal analysis, the Court cited previous judgments, including the case of Deepak v. State of Uttar Pradesh, to emphasize that a single assault without premeditation could lead to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC. The Court also referred to a recent judgment in the case of Anbazhagan vs. The State to elaborate on the legal principles for determining the intention or knowledge of the accused.

Supreme Court concluded that "the appellant's act was not premeditated and occurred in the heat of the moment." It further noted that the appellant and the deceased were in love, and the altercation was due to a change in their relationship. "Had there been any intention to do away with the life of the deceased, obviously the appellant would have come prepared and would have assaulted the deceased with pre-meditation," the judgment stated.

Apex Court altered the conviction to one under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced the appellant to the period already undergone. He will be released forthwith if not required in any other case.

 Date of Decision: September 06, 2023                                                 

RAMKUMAR vs THE STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE               

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/06-Sep-2023-N.Ramkumar_Vs_State.pdf"]

Latest Legal News