Explore a fascinating legal case where the court delves deep into the concept of intent in culpable homicide. The court’s insightful analysis highlights the fine line between murder and culpable homicide, emphasizing key factors that determine the nature of the crime. Find out how the court’s interpretation of legislative terms played a crucial role in this intriguing case.
Facts
- Appellant convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.
- Trial Court judgment found appellant guilty of murder after considering evidence.
- Courts below overlooked important aspects of the case and upheld the conviction.
- Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed in impugned order.
- The appellant pushed SI Tiwari off the truck, causing him to be run over by the rear wheels.
- The police were alerted of the incident through telephonic conversation.
- The appellant fled the scene with the truck after the incident.
- SI Tiwari was warned by the accused not to board the truck but he ignored the warning.
- Several witnesses, exhibits, and medical reports were presented during the trial.
- The prosecution primarily relied on the statements of key eyewitnesses.
- The accused presented oral evidence including a witness who claimed to be the conductor in the truck during the incident.
- SI Tiwari signaled the truck to stop, which was being driven by the appellant.
- The appellant attempted to speed away instead of stopping, leading to the tragic event.
Also Read: Electoral Malpractices in Mayor Election
Arguments
- The defense argued that there were fatal contradictions and exaggerations in the depositions of PW-2, PW-10, PW-14, and PW-15.
- It was pointed out that the witness had not previously stated that the truck sped after slowing down but mentioned it during the trial.
- The defense questioned the suspicious unity in the testimonies of all eye witnesses resembling that of PW-2.
- No motive on the part of the accused was found in the material on record.
- Claims were made regarding improvements made to original statements by PW-2 and PW-10 during the trial.
- It was argued that without the deceased actually boarding the truck near the driver, it would be impossible for the accused to push him with enough force for him to fall off and get crushed under the rear wheels.
- Medical evidence supported prosecution’s version of the incident
- The evidence showed that SI Tiwari was pushed and deliberately run over by the appellant
- Multiple injuries on SI Tiwari’s body indicated a deliberate act with intent to kill
- The appellant’s intention to kill was established beyond reasonable doubt
- The appellant threatened to kill SI Tiwari if he interfered with the truck’s movement
- The appellant pushed SI Tiwari out of the truck in a cold-blooded manner and ran over him deliberately
Also Read: Balancing Power and Transparency: Electoral Bonds Struck Down, Disclosure Mandated
Analysis
- The importance of the exact sequence of events in the case is highlighted.
- The appellant’s warning to SI Tiwari about being killed lacks weight as it lacked real intention.
- The confusion caused when courts lose sight of the true scope of legislative terms.
- The act resulting in SI Tiwari’s death was not premeditated.
- The significance of the nature of intention in determining the crime.
- The use of the term ‘likely’ in culpable homicide situations adds an element of uncertainty.
- The inconsistency in witness testimonies and the propensity for exaggeration.
- The need to distinguish between murder under Section 302 and culpable homicide under Section 304.
- Factors to consider in determining intention to cause death in a criminal act.
- The challenge of distinguishing between culpable homicide and murder.
- The establishment of factual elements by the prosecution but the lack of clear intention by the appellant.
- Murder is a type of culpable homicide but not all culpable homicides are murders.
- The Penal Code distinguishes between ‘culpable homicide’ and ‘murder’.
- The lowest type of culpable homicide is ‘culpable homicide of the third degree’.
- In cases of culpable homicide, there may be no premeditation.
- The key to interpreting and applying provisions related to culpable homicide lies in focusing on the keywords in Sections 299 and 300 of the Penal Code.
- Courts need to carefully consider the intention behind an act to determine if it falls under murder or culpable homicide.
- The appellant’s disproportionate reaction led to the deceased being thrown off the vehicle.
- The act of throwing off the deceased and driving on without pausing was in the heat of passion or rage.
- Conviction under Section 302 IPC was deemed inappropriate.
- The appellant should be convicted under the first part of Section 304 IPC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as he intended to cause harm resulting in the deceased’s death.
Also Read: Recall of Resolution Plan Approval: Legal Analysis
Decision
- The appeal has succeeded and has been allowed.
- No costs have been imposed.
- The conviction originally recorded under Section 302 IPC has been altered to one under Section 304 Part I, IPC.
- The appellant’s sentence has been modified from life imprisonment to 10 years’ RI.
- The direction to pay the fine remains unchanged.
Case Title: MOHD. RAFIQ @ KALLU Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (2021 INSC 481)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000856-000856 / 2021
