Markash Jajara vs The State of Assam & Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

3 November 2023

Case No.

Criminal Appeal No.3405 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta

Citation

[2023] 14 S.C.R. 834 : 2023 INSC 1015

Issue for consideration

The appellant was held guilty of having committed the murder of his son-in-law. Whether the offence attributed to the appellant falls within the ambit of Exception I of Section 300 IPC which defines “murder”.

Headnote

Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 and Exception I of s.300 IPC – The occurrence took place inside the house of the appellant – The informant had gone to the house of the appellant and found his brother, who had been staying with his in-laws, lying dead – Trial Court on consideration of the evidence held the appellant guilty of committing an offence u/s.

302 IPC and consequently, sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment – Appeal was dismissed by the High Court – Propriety: Held: The appellant’s motive at best was to prevent the deceased from misbehaving with his daughter after consuming alcohol – The manner in which the occurrence appears to have taken place inside the house, does indicate that the appellant lost his self-control on account of persistent provocation and suddenly thrashed his son-in-law with the bamboo stick – It is a case where provocation seems to be brewing up since the deceased shifted to the appellant’s house – It acquired enormous gravity with each recurrence of humiliating stances of the appellant’s daughter – The fatal occurrence was seemingly the final culmination of loss of the power of self-control – The simmering discontent of a frustrated and hapless father unfortunately led him to strike the deceased with a bamboo stick – The series of provocative acts attributable to the deceased indeed laid the foundation of sustained provocation – In the facts and circumstances of the present case, it appears that the act of the appellant in causing injuries to the deceased falls within the expression of `culpable homicide’ which does not amount to `murder’ – In considered opinion of this Court, the ends of justice would be adequately met by converting the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to the appellant to rigorous imprisonment of ten years – The sentence as awarded by the courts below stands modified accordingly. [Paras 17,18,19] OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT 1. Leave granted. 2. The Gauhati High Court has dismissed the jail appeal, vide the impugned judgment dated 12.03.2019, preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 03.10.2016, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat whereby the appellant was held guilty of having committed the murder of his son-in-law, namely, late Markush Borja and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/- with the stipulated imprisonment of six months on default of payment of the fine amount in Sessions Case No.188(J-T)/2015, a

View Subscription Plans →