IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court Limitation | Litigants Cannot Entirely Blame Advocates for Procedural Delays: Supreme Court Family's Criminal Past Cannot Dictate Passport Eligibility: Madhya Pradesh High Court Double Presumption of Innocence Bolsters Acquittal When Evidence Falls Short: Calcutta High Court Upholds Essential Commodities Act TIP Not Mandatory if Witness Testimony  Credible - Recovery of Weapon Not Essential for Conviction Under Section 397 IPC: Delhi High Court University’s Failure to Amend Statutes for EWS Reservation Renders Advertisement Unsustainable: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh Quashes EWS Reservation in University Recruitment Process

Premeditated Murder with an Axe: Jharkhand High Court Upholds Life Sentence for Fatal Blow After Initial Quarrel

02 October 2024 8:12 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


High Court of Jharkhand upheld the conviction and life sentence of Ashok Singh for murder in the case of Ashok Singh vs. State of Jharkhand. The court confirmed the judgment delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge in Palamau, which found the appellant guilty under Sections 302 (murder) and 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court dismissed the appeal, reaffirming the trial court's ruling that Singh intentionally murdered Shyamdeo Singh by striking him on the head with an axe.

The case originated from an altercation between Ashok Singh and Shyamdeo Singh on February 28, 2015, at around 8 PM. The dispute escalated when the appellant, after initially being separated from the deceased by villagers, returned with an axe and struck the deceased on the head. The victim, severely injured, was rushed to multiple hospitals but eventually succumbed to his injuries on March 3, 2015, in Varanasi. A First Information Report (FIR) was lodged five days later, on March 5, 2015.

The key legal issue before the court was whether the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that Ashok Singh had intentionally committed murder. The defense argued that there was no direct evidence and raised concerns about the delay in filing the FIR, contradictions in witness statements, and non-recovery of the murder weapon (axe).

Multiple eyewitnesses, including the wife and son of the deceased, corroborated the sequence of events leading to the fatal attack.

The injuries sustained by the deceased, as confirmed by the postmortem report, matched the description of the attack.

The delay in lodging the FIR was sufficiently explained, as the family prioritized medical attention for the victim.

Non-recovery of the murder weapon was not deemed fatal to the prosecution’s case since the eyewitness testimony clearly established the weapon used.

The court noted that the appellant's actions were deliberate and premeditated. Initially, there was a quarrel between the appellant and the deceased, but after being separated, the appellant retrieved an axe from his house and attacked the victim. The court highlighted:

“The appellant went to his house and brought an axe and thereafter assaulted the deceased which suggests that he had motive to commit the murder of the deceased.”

Furthermore, the court rejected the defense’s claim that the case was based on hearsay and circumstantial evidence, as the testimonies of the eyewitnesses were consistent and corroborated by medical evidence. The court also dismissed the argument about the FIR's delay, considering the circumstances of the incident and the family's focus on trying to save the victim's life.

The High Court concluded that the prosecution successfully proved Ashok Singh's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the delay in filing the FIR was justified. The conviction and life sentence imposed by the trial court were affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.

 

Date of Decision:October 1, 2024

Ashok Singh vs. State of Jharkhand

Similar News