Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |    

Appellants Entitled to Benefit of Doubt: Supreme Court Alters Conviction From 302 IPC To 304-Part II

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India altered the conviction of the appellants involved in an altercation that led to a death. The bench, comprising Justice B.R. GAVAI, Justice B.V. NAGARATHNA, and Justice PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, delivered the judgment on November 03, 2023.

The case revolved around an incident where the appellants were part of an unlawful assembly accused of assaulting the complainant party, resulting in the death of an individual named Madan. The appellants were initially convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

In the judgment, the court observed, ”Undisputedly, from the evidence of Chironji (PW-6) and Ramhet (PW-12), it is clear that the present appellants were members of the unlawful assembly.” However, the court also noted that there was no specific role attributed to the appellants in assaulting the deceased Madan.

The defense highlighted that the accused had sustained injuries during the altercation, which were not explained by the prosecution. The court acknowledged this point, stating, ”The injuries sustained by three accused persons are not at all explained. The trial court and the High Court have not considered this aspect of the matter.”

Considering the possibility that the accused did not intend to cause death, the Supreme Court altered the conviction, stating, ”We are therefore of the considered view that the appellants are entitled to benefit of doubt. The conviction under Section 302 IPC would not be sustainable.”

The court concluded by altering the conviction under Section 302 IPC to Part-II of Section 304 IPC and sentencing the appellants to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years.

This judgment underscores the importance of considering all aspects of a case, including the intention behind the actions and the circumstances surrounding the incident.

Date of Decision: 03 November 2023

PARSHURAM VS STATE OF M.P.       

      

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/03-Nov-2023-Parshuram-Vs-State-MP.pdf"]

Similar News