Orissa HC: Directors Liable under S.138 NI Act Despite Company’s Insolvency  ||  Bombay HC: GST Return Details of Company Exempt from Disclosure under RTI Act  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Timely Appointment of Electronic Evidence Examiners Vital in Cyber Crime Probes  ||  Bombay HC: GST Return Details of Company Exempt from Disclosure under RTI Act  ||  Bombay HC: GST Return Details of Company Exempt from Disclosure under RTI Act  ||  Bombay HC: Appeal under Section 37 A&C Doesn’t Bar Fresh Arbitration Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Upload Nodal Officer Details on Vatsalya Portal for Missing Child Cases  ||  NCLAT: ED Cannot Keep Attached Assets After Resolution Plan Approval  ||  SC: Gender-Neutral JAG Appointments Judgment Not Retrospective  ||  Supreme Court Rejects Telangana Govt Plea on HC Stay of 42% Backward Classes Reservation    

Pardeshiram Vs. State of M.P. - (Supreme Court) (09 Feb 2021)

When cause of provocation was sudden, without premeditation, case falls under Exception 4 of Section 300 of IPC

MANU/SC/0062/2021

Criminal

The challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by the High Court whereby an appeal against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence was dismissed. The Appellant has argued that, the offence was committed without premeditation in the sudden fight in the heat of passion and, thus, falls within Exception 4 of Section 300 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The Accused is an agriculturist, and the Shovel is a part of an agricultural tool that is possessed by agriculturists. The Accused was attributed with the first blow with the Shovel followed a hit by a stone on the head of the deceased which was picked up from the street.

The Accused and the deceased were from the same family. The cause of provocation was sudden, without premeditation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a case falling under Exception 4 of Section 300 of IPC. The injuries were inflicted without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken advantage or acted cruelly or unusually. The Appellant is liable to be convicted for an offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC.

The Appellant has served more than 18 years of his jail sentence. Therefore, keeping in view the period of custody undergone; the relationship between the Accused and the deceased and the background in which the injuries were caused, present Court allows the appeal partly. The Appellant is convicted for an offence under Section 304 Part I of IPC and sentence him to the sentence already undergone.

Tags : CONVICTION   SENTENCE   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved