Summary
After a verbal altercation over two motorcycles not giving way to a car, ten accused stopped the car later that night and made the occupants alight. In a further altercation A1 and A3 picked up casuarina sticks and A2 a brick; A1 and A2 each struck the deceased once on the head and neck, and A3 injured three others. The High Court, finding no unlawful assembly, acquitted three accused but sustained the conviction of A1 to A3 under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The Supreme Court held the offence was culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II: there was no premeditation, the accused were unarmed when they stopped the car and picked up weapons from the spot in a sudden quarrel, each dealt a single blow, the alleged exhortation to kill was not proved and both groups were young men. Sentence reduced to the period already undergone.
Issues
- Whether a fatal assault with a stick and a brick picked up from the spot, during a sudden altercation following an earlier quarrel over overtaking, with a single blow each and no proved exhortation to kill, amounts to murder under Section 302 IPC or culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II IPC.
- What circumstances guide the court in distinguishing murder from culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Provisions considered
- Sections 299, 300, 302 and 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, 1860Applying the degrees of culpable homicide explained in Rayavarapu Punnayya and the indicia of intention listed in Pulicherla Nagaraju as summarised in Mohd. Rafiq, the absence of premeditation, the weapons picked up from the spot, single blows and the sudden quarrel placed the case in Section 304 Part II rather than Section 302. (¶¶ 16, 17, 21, 23)
- Section 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860With the High Court having found no unlawful assembly and acquitted the others under Section 149, the three appellants stood convicted with the aid of Section 34, which was maintained for the remaining offences. (¶¶ 1, 21, 23)
- Sections 341, 323, 324 and 427 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860Convictions and sentences for wrongful restraint, hurt, hurt by dangerous weapon and mischief to the car were maintained. (¶ 23)
Held
- The occurrence as set up by the prosecution was duly established: the FIR was prompt, the medical evidence corroborated the injured eyewitnesses PW-1, PW-2 and PW-4 who knew the accused as neighbours, the material objects were recovered and proved, and the deceased died of the injuries caused by A1 with a stick and A2 with a brick, while A3 caused hurt to the witnesses. The only question was the nature of the homicide. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 15)
- The intention to cause death is gathered from circumstances such as the nature of the weapon, whether it was carried or picked up from the spot, whether the blow was aimed at a vital part, the force used, whether the act was in a sudden quarrel or by chance, prior enmity, provocation, heat of passion, cruelty and whether a single or several blows were dealt (Pulicherla Nagaraju, as cited in Mohd. Rafiq). Culpable homicide is the genus and murder its species, with three degrees of culpable homicide punishable under Sections 302, 304 Part I and 304 Part II. (¶ 17)
- The case fell under Section 304 Part II because there was no premeditation; the accused were unarmed when they stopped the car; the sticks and brick were picked up from the roadside during the verbal altercation; A1 and A2 dealt a single blow each; the exhortation to kill attributed to A3 was not proved, the witnesses being unsure they had so stated under Section 161 CrPC; both groups were young men; the High Court had found no unlawful assembly or common object; and the appellants were convicted with the aid of Section 34. Gulab v. State of U.P., concerning Section 34, had no bearing on the murder–culpable homicide distinction. (¶¶ 19, 21, 22, 23)
- The appellants having been in jail for several years, the sentence under Section 304 Part II was fixed at the period already undergone. (¶ 24)
Result
Appeals partly allowed; conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside and the appellants convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC, sentenced to the period already undergone and ordered to be released forthwith unless required in another case; convictions and sentences under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 427 read with Section 34 IPC maintained.