Summary
The Supreme Court accepted the established eyewitness and medical account of the shooting but converted the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC. The fatal single gunshot occurred in a spur-of-the-moment altercation over excavation of a mound, after the accused fetched a pistol and the complainant’s son intervened. Considering these circumstances, the Court substituted ten years’ imprisonment for the life sentence.
Issues
- Whether the established circumstances of the shooting warranted alteration of the murder conviction to Section 304 IPC.
Held
- The eyewitness account, including the deceased’s father’s natural presence and selective account of those involved, was supported by medical evidence. The occurrence and appellant’s role were established. (¶¶ 3, 4)
- The shooting arose from a sudden altercation about excavation, with the deceased intervening after the appellant brought a pistol. On these circumstances the Court considered Section 304 Part I, rather than Section 302, the appropriate conviction. (¶¶ 5, 6, 7)
Result
Appeal allowed in the stated terms; Section 302 conviction converted to Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence fixed at ten years’ imprisonment.