Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

"Court Convicts in Tragic Burn Case: Culpable Homicide, Not Murder"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal verdict, the judiciary has delivered a judgment in a heart-wrenching case of a fatal burn incident. The defendant has been convicted of culpable homicide, with a sentence of 10 years in prison and a fine of Rs.1,000. Furthermore, the defendant has been acquitted of charges under Sections 498A and 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

The verdict was pronounced by Justices Shivkumar Dige and A.S. Gadkari, who examined the case closely. Their observations shed light on the tragic incident and the intent behind it. As the judgment was delivered, Justice Dige remarked, "The act of the defendant falls under Section 304 (Part-II) of the IPC."

The Court considered the circumstances surrounding the incident and found that it had occurred suddenly during a heated moment. Justice Gadkari emphasized, "The incident happened in the spur of the moment, and the defendant had knowledge about the act he was committing. Therefore, the offense is culpable homicide not amounting to murder."

Apart from the legal outcome, the Court addressed the issue of legal fees for the defendant's representation. Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan, the appointed counsel to prosecute the defendant's case by the Legal Aid Committee, has been granted legal fees and expenses quantified at Rs. 20,000. This decision was taken in recognition of the importance of providing effective legal representation.

The Court's decision has set a precedent in understanding cases involving fatal incidents and distinguishing between intentional murder and culpable homicide. The verdict has sent a message about the significance of evaluating the circumstances and intent behind such unfortunate events.

This landmark judgment serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in criminal cases and the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice is served in a fair and comprehensive manner.

D.D-12.Oct.2023

Israr Mukhtar Varsi, vs The State of Maharashtra         

Latest Legal News