Supreme Court Alters Conviction U/S 302 IPC To  Part-I of U/S 304 IPC

New Delhi, August 01, 2023*: In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court of India has altered the conviction of Nirmala Devi, the accused in a homicide case, from Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to Part-I of Section 304. The judgment was delivered by the bench of Justices B.R. GAVAI and J.B. PARDIWALA.

The case revolved around the tragic death of Mast Ram, the deceased, on May 26, 2015. Nirmala Devi, his wife, was accused of causing his demise and was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. The High Court upheld the judgment, but the Supreme Court, on reviewing the case, found compelling reasons to alter the conviction.

Justice B.R. GAVAI, speaking for the bench, stated, “The short question that falls for consideration is as to whether the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC would be required to be maintained, or whether the case would fall under a lesser offence.”

The crux of the judgment hinged on the testimony of Priyanka (PW-1), the daughter of the deceased. The Court acknowledged that there were doubts about the veracity of her evidence. Justice GAVAI asserted, “If the testimony of the prosecution witnesses is found to be unreliable, then the benefit ought to have been in favour of the deceased.”

Upon careful scrutiny of Priyanka’s testimony, the Court found it difficult to sustain the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC. The weapon used in the crime was a simple stick, not considered a deadly weapon, which raised the possibility of the appellant acting under provocation.

The judgment took into account the strained relations between the deceased and the accused, along with the background of persistent quarrels between them. The Court noted that the deceased had previously fractured the accused’s leg during one such altercation, and a criminal case was pending against him.

The bench held that the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt, and the offence committed would fall under Exception I of Section 300 IPC. Consequently, the conviction was altered to Part-I of Section 304 IPC, resulting in a different sentence.

Justice GAVAI emphasized, “The appellant has already been incarcerated for a period of almost 9 years, and, therefore, we find that the sentence already undergone would serve the ends of justice.”

The verdict in this case marks a significant decision that considers the circumstances and provocation involved in a homicide, leading to a reduced conviction for the accused. Legal experts view this judgment as an important precedent for future cases involving similar circumstances.

*Quote from Judgment: “In our considered view, the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt, inasmuch as the offence committed shall fall under Exception I of Section 300 IPC. Thus, the conviction under Section 302 IPC needs to be altered into Part-I of Section 304 IPC.”*

Date of Decision: August 01, 2023

NIRMALA DEVI vs STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH