MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Justice Reconsidered: Orissa High Court Rules 'Heat of Passion' Mitigates Murder to Culpable Homicide

05 September 2024 6:09 AM

By: Admin


In a notable judgement on November 2, 2023, the High Court of Orissa delivered a verdict that has become a focal point of legal discussions. The appellant, Leven Kerketta, who was previously convicted under Section 302 of the IPC for the murder of the deceased, saw his conviction altered by the High Court. The bench comprising the Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.K. Sahoo and Mr. Justice Chittaranjan Dash found merit in the argument of ‘grave and sudden provocation,’ leading to a significant change in the appellant’s sentence.

The court observed, “The possibility of raising protest by the appellant to the conduct of his wife (P.W.1) and the deceased and also raising sudden quarrel cannot be ruled out.” This observation came in light of the defense’s argument that the appellant had been provoked upon seeing his wife in the company of the deceased under compromising circumstances.

The Hon’ble judges further noted, “The objective test is whether a reasonable man is likely to lose his self-control as a result of such provocation.” Based on this rationale, the court held that the appellant’s actions fell under Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC, leading to the modification of his conviction to Section 304 Part-II, which denotes culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

In delivering their decision, the bench also took into account the time that Kerketta had already spent in custody. They stated, “As the appellant has remained in jail custody for more than five years at different times in connection with this case and in the meantime, more than twenty-two years have already been passed since the date of occurrence and the appellant is more than sixty years of age...” This led to the reduction of his sentence to the period already undergone.

The court’s decision underscores the significance of the circumstances under which a crime is committed and opens up a dialogue on the interpretation of provocation in the eyes of the law. The case, represented by Mr. Laxmi Narayan Patel for the appellant and Mr. Sonak Mishra for the state, has thus concluded with a judgement that emphasizes the human element in legal proceedings, acknowledging the complex interplay of emotions and actions.

Date of Decision: 02.11.2023

Leven Kerketta VS State of Odisha         

Latest Legal News