Mariappan vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

24 November 2023

Case No.

Criminal Appeal No. 3598 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

Vikram Nath, Rajesh Bindal

Citation

[2023] 15 S.C.R. 1074 : 2023 INSC 1034

Issue for consideration

On the day of incident, heated arguments took place between the two parties. During the quarrel, accused nos.1 and

Headnote

2 stabbed victim multiple times with sooriknives, while accused no.3, though armed with a spade handle, did not inflict injuries but facilitated in the attack. The appellant-accused was convicted u/s. 302 IPC. Whether the acts of the accused would come under Exception 4 to s.300 IPC or would be an act of culpable homicide amounting to murder punishable u/s. 302. Penal Code, 1860 – s. 302 and s.304 Part-I – Trial Court after examining witnesses and material evidence, convicted appellantaccused no.1 u/s. 302 IPC and acquitted accused nos. 2 and 3 from all charges levelled against them – The High Court confirmed the order of conviction u/s. 302 of the IPC – Propriety:

Held: Right from the beginning i.e. the prosecution story as set up in the FIR was that initially there was a heated discussion between the parties and in a fit of anger the physical assault took place – Even the ocular testimony is also to the same effect – Although on the same evidence the Trial Court has acquitted two co-accused and convicted only the appellant – It has also come in evidence that the appellant had caused only one injury whereas other accused had caused multiple injuries – However, the Trial Court acquitted the other two accused – The previous enmity between the appellant and the deceased had been a contributory factor leading to the verbal altercation but it was not the reason for the accused to carry out a pre-planned fatal attack against the deceased – The appellant had acted “suddenly”, in the heat of passion and without a pre-planned approach to kill the deceased – Hence, it can be safely concluded from the evidence led in the present case that the appellant’s overt act of killing the deceased happened during a fit of anger in the heat of a passionate verbal quarrel and would fall under Exception 4 to s.300 IPC – The conviction u/s. 302 IPC is converted to s. 304 Part-I IPC. [Paras 11, 12 and 13] LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES

Rampal Singh v. State of U.P, (2012) 8 SCC 289 : [2012] 7 SCR 160; Surinder Kumar v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, (1989) 2 SCC 217 : [1989]

1 SCR 941 – relied on.

OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT ORDER VIKRAM NATH, J. 1. This appeal assails the correctness of the final Judgment and Order dated 22.04.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No.151 of 2013 whereby the High Court has dismissed the appeal of the present appellant and confirmed the order of conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 and awarding life sentence passed on 05.10.2012 by the Trial Court. IPC 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: 2.1 The case involves the offence of culpable homicide committed by the present

View Subscription Plans →