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 Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Heated Clash – Convert Conviction U/S 302 To 304 Part I IPC Emphasizes: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


 In a recent judgment delivered on October 30, 2023, the Supreme Court of India upheld the conviction of the accused in a case stemming from a heated clash that resulted in injuries and a fatality. Supreme Court converted conviction u/s 302 to 304 Part I of the IPC. The court’s decision underscored the significance of evaluating the credibility of eyewitnesses in criminal proceedings.

The case, arising from a 2001 incident in Rajasthan, involved multiple accused charged with offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Notably, the accused were originally convicted under Sections 302 (murder) and 307 (attempt to murder) IPC by the trial court.

One of the critical aspects of the judgment was the evaluation of the injured eyewitness, PW-2 Rami, who was also the wife of the deceased victim. Despite lengthy cross-examination and discrepancies between her statements under Section 161 CrPC and her examination-in-chief, the Supreme Court stressed the importance of not easily discarding the testimony of an injured eyewitness.

Supreme Court stated , “Minor discrepancies do not matter. The circumstances highlighted by the High Court to attach vulnerability to the evidence of the injured witnesses are clearly inconsequential.” This assertion reiterates the court’s stance that minor contradictions in the statements of an injured witness should not discredit their entire testimony.

The court acknowledged that while there were contradictions in the statements of PW-2, who was a reliable witness, these contradictions were not sufficient to discredit her entirely. It further noted that the overall circumstances of the case indicated that the incident may not have been premeditated, potentially falling under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.

Supreme Court converted the convictions from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part I IPC) and from attempt to murder to a lesser offense (Section 308 IPC). The accused were sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 Part I IPC and three years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 308 IPC.

The judgment also addressed the issue of injuries sustained by the accused, emphasizing that the evidence presented by the defense was not credible. It highlighted the suspension of a government doctor, DW-4, who testified for the defense, casting doubt on his credibility.

Supreme Court’s decision in this case serves as a reminder of the importance of evaluating eyewitness testimony, especially when the witness is injured. It emphasizes that minor contradictions should not lead to the wholesale rejection of a witness’s account. This judgment reinforces the principle that the credibility of eyewitnesses should be carefully assessed in criminal proceedings.

Date of Decision: October 30, 2023

BIRBAL NATH VS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN &   ORS. 

 

Latest Legal News