MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

Orissa High Court Modifies Conviction in Landmark Judgment: "Lack of Immediate Intention to Cause Death" Leads to Reduced Sentence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on February 29, 2024, the Orissa High Court altered a conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code, in the case of Ashu Khila vs. State of Orissa. The Division Bench, comprising Justices D. Dash and G. Satapathy, made this landmark decision in Criminal Appeal No. 656 of 2011.

The appellant, Ashu Khila, was originally convicted under Section 302 of IPC for the murder of his wife, following an incident where he set her on fire leading to her death after two months. However, the High Court, after re-evaluating the evidence and circumstances, observed a crucial point in their judgment, stating, "The aforesaid circumstances may rule out the immediate intention of the convict to cause death of the deceased."

This observation played a pivotal role in the court's decision to modify the conviction. The court considered the fact that the appellant had admitted the victim to the hospital after the incident and the victim's subsequent discharge on request. These factors, combined with the medical evidence suggesting that the injuries were initially classified as simple in nature, influenced the court's decision.

Highlighting the complexity of the case, the court noted, "The act of the convict can be attributed to his intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death of the deceased." Consequently, the bench ruled that the appellant's actions fell under Section 304 Part-I of IPC, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

As a result of this alteration in the conviction, the High Court sentenced the appellant to ten years of Rigorous Imprisonment, taking into consideration the mitigating circumstances surrounding the case. This judgment represents a nuanced understanding of the intent behind criminal acts, marking a significant moment in the legal landscape of criminal justice in India.

Date of Decision:  29-02-2024

ASHU KHILA VS STATE OF ORISSA

Similar News