Without Partition By Metes And Bounds, Co-Sharer Cannot Seek Recovery Of Possession: Supreme Court Clarifies Limits Of Order VII Rule 7 CPC Supreme Court Holds Plaintiff Entitled To Declaration Of Title Over Undivided Half Share Despite Claiming Entire Property Under Gift Deed Supreme Court Reaffirms Legality Of Remainder Of Natural Life Sentences Without Remission, Dismisses Batch Of Writ Petitions 'State Cannot Take Advantage Of Its Own Wrong': Supreme Court Holds Promotees Entitled To Count Ad Hoc Service For Seniority If Within Quota 'Elevators Are Common Carriers, Entail Heightened Duty of Care': Supreme Court Upholds NCDRC Order Holding OTIS Principally Liable For Death Due To Malfunctioning Lift Supreme Court Dismisses Compensation Claim Under Motor Vehicles Act, Holds Reach Stacker Operating in Custom-Bonded ICD Area Is Not a "Motor Vehicle" Missing ACRs Due To Illegal Termination Cannot Block Higher Judicial Pay Scales: Supreme Court Grants Relief To Rajasthan Judicial Officer Subsequent Suit Generally Transferable To Court Where Earlier Suit On Same Subject Matter Is Pending: Allahabad High Court Successive Anticipatory Bail Maintainable Under BNSS If Fact Situation Changes Or Previous Findings Become Obsolete: Andhra Pradesh High Court Tenant's "Deemed Purchaser" Right Defeated By Retrospective Notification Under Section 88(1)(b) Of Tenancy Act: Bombay High Court Buyer Not Entitled To Refund Of Earnest Money Once Sale Deed Is Duly Executed Under The Agreement: Calcutta High Court Contradictory Pleas Vitiate Defence; Drawer Liable Even If Signed Blank Cheque Was Handed Over: Delhi High Court Working Mother's Relocation To Another City Not A Ground To Completely Deny Overnight Custody To Father: Karnataka High Court Civil Courts Barred From Granting Injunctions Against SARFAESI Actions Even If Partition Suit Is Maintainable: Kerala High Court S.147 NI Act Is A Special Law, Overrides S.320 CrPC; Offence Can Be Compounded At Any Stage Even After Dismissal Of Appeal: Madras High Court Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court

Teasing by Children Cannot Be Considered Grave and Sudden Provocation Under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC: Gauhati High Court Upholds Life Sentence for Man Convicted of Murdering a 7-Year-Old Boy

28 September 2024 2:15 PM

By: sayum


Gauhati High Court dismissed an appeal in Albish Banda alias Lakra vs. State of Assam, affirming the conviction and life sentence of the appellant for the murder of a 7-year-old child. The court ruled that the killing was not a case of sudden provocation and rejected the defense’s argument under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.

The incident occurred on March 5, 2019, in Baksa District, Assam, when the appellant, Albish Banda, murdered Rajen Ekka, a 7-year-old child, by attacking him with a dao. The appellant claimed that he was provoked by teasing from the children while collecting sour fruits, leading to the deadly attack. However, two eyewitnesses, who were present at the scene, testified that the attack was sudden and unprovoked.

The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court in Baksa in February 2021 and sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC. He appealed, arguing that the murder was a result of grave and sudden provocation, making it a case under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.

The primary issue before the High Court was whether the appellant’s actions could be classified under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC, which reduces the charge from murder (Section 302) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304), if the act is committed due to sudden provocation without premeditation.

The defense argued that the minor children’s taunting constituted provocation, and the act was done in the heat of passion. The prosecution, however, pointed to the nature of the injuries inflicted, which were excessive and on vital parts of the body, including the neck and head.

The Gauhati High Court, presided by Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Mitali Thakuria, rejected the defense’s argument. The court held that teasing by children could not be considered as grave provocation and emphasized that the number and severity of the injuries indicated that the appellant had acted in a cruel and unusual manner, which disqualified him from the protection under Exception 4.

The court noted that the appellant had inflicted multiple deep cuts on the child’s neck, face, and skull, which led to instantaneous death. The judges observed that these actions demonstrated a cruel intent, and the appellant had taken undue advantage of the situation by attacking a defenseless 7-year-old child.

The court cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Anil Kumar vs. State of Kerala (2023), which clarified that for Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC to apply, the offender must not take undue advantage or act in a cruel manner.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and life sentence for the appellant under Section 302 IPC were upheld. The court also commended the Amicus Curiae for their assistance in the case.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2024

Albish Banda alias Lakra vs. State of Assam​.

Latest Legal News