Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

“Appellant’s Sentence Reduced to Five Years R.I. in Culpable Homicide Case: ‘Mitigating Circumstances Considered’ Says Hon’ble Shri Justice Prem Narayan Singh”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore has reduced the sentence of the appellant, Ghanshyam, who was convicted under Sections 304-II and 323 of IPC. The judgment was delivered by Hon’ble Shri Justice Prem Narayan Singh on August 29, 2023.

The appellant was initially sentenced to 10 years and 3 months R.I. with a fine. However, the High Court considered “mitigating circumstances such as the appellant’s long trial period and lack of premeditation” in reducing the sentence to five years R.I. with a fine of Rs. 10,000.

The Court clarified that the legal maxim “falsus in uno falsus in omnibus” does not apply in India, stating, “Testimony of witnesses cannot be disregarded solely because other co-accused persons are acquitted.”

The defense had argued that the sentence was excessive and that the witnesses were interested parties. The Court, however, held that “the maxim ‘falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ has no application in India and the witnesses cannot be branded as liar.”

The Court also rejected the argument that the appellant should be charged under Section 325 of IPC for a single blow. It held that the appellant’s act of using a lathi encircled by iron wire on a vital part of the body made him liable for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 (Part-II) of IPC.

The appellant, who is currently on bail, has been directed to surrender before the trial Court within 15 days to complete the remaining part of the sentence.

The judgment has cited several precedents, including the case of Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in AIR 1956 SC 460 and Jaswinder Singh (Dead) through Lrs Vs. Navjot Singh Sidhu and others reported in AIR 2022 SC 2441.

This ruling is expected to have implications on how mitigating circumstances are considered in sentencing for serious offenses.

Date of Decision: 29.08.2023

GHANSHYAM vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Latest Legal News