LexASHOK SAXENA versus THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 1 S.C.R. 1454 : 2025 INSC 148 Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc. (Criminal Appeal No(s). 1704-1705 of 2015) 30 January 2025 [J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court committed any error in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.301, exception 4 to s.300, s.304 Part-I – Murder – Culpable homicide by causing death of person other than person whose death was intended – Culpable homicide not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight – When – On facts, altercation between the parties – Appellant armed with knife and co-accused with hockey stick trespassed into the house of the first informant with the intention to lay an assault on him – Informant’s wife intervened and in the process the appellant alleged to have inflicted knife blow in the abdomen of the wife, resulting in her death – Trial court acquitted the appellant, however, the High Court convicted him u/s.302 – Correctness: Held: Even for the sake of argument, the appellant had no intention to cause death of the deceased, the doctrine of transfer of malice, as contemplated u/s.301 applicable to the instant case and the appellant would be guilty u/s.302 – Having regard to the genesis of the occurrence, the case falls within exception 4 to s.300 – Impugned judgment modified – Appellant to be convicted for the offence punishable u/s.304 Part-I and sentence reduced to the period already undergone since incident is of 1992 and that the appellant is aged 74 years. [Paras 36-46] Case Law Cited Gyanendra Kumar v. State of U.P., AIR 1972 SC 502; Hari Shankar Sharma v. State of Mysore, 1979 UJ 659 (SC); Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1991 SC 982 : 1991 CrLJ 597; Abdul Ise Suleman v. State of Gujarat, 1995 CrLJ 464 – referred to. [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1455 Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Penal Code, 1860. List of Keywords Murder; Culpable homicide by causing death of person other than person whose death was intended; Altercation between the parties; Intention to lay assault; Doctrine of transfer of malice. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No(s). 1704-1705 of 2015 From the Judgment and Order dated 20.01.2015 of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in GA No. 82 of 2001 and CRLR No. 359 of 2001 Appearances for Parties Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv., Jasbir Singh Malik, Ms. Rhythm Bharadwaj, Ms. Suman Sharma, Ms. Niharika Singh, Varun Punia, Advs. for the Appellant. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Ms. Saakshi Singh Rawat, Sunny Sachin Rawat, Ajay Kumar Bahuguna, Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Order 1. These appeals arise from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital dated 20-01-2015 by which the appeal filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh came to be allowed and thereby the judgment and Order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 204 of 1994 came to be set aside. 2. Since, we intend to dispose of this appeal on a short ground we need not reproduce the facts or rather the case of the prosecution in details. We borrow the facts as stated by the High Court in its impugned judgment and order. We quote the relevant part of the High Court’s judgment:- “Present Govt. Appeal has been filed by the State being aggrieved against the judgment and order dated 06.11.1996 1456 [2025] 1 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports passed by learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, whereby the respondents were acquitted of the charge(s) levelled against them. Respondent Ashok Saxena was exonerated of the charge levelled against him under Section 302 IPC and the respondent no. 2 Yashpal Singh was exonerated of the charge levelled against him under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, giving them benefit of doubt. Respondent Yashpal Singh died during the pendency of the Govt. Appeal, on 24.01.2007, which fact is admitted to both the sides and therefore, this Court proceeds to discuss the appeal only against respondent no. 1 Ashok Saxena filed by the State. 2. Earlier, on a Govt. Appeal, being Govt. Appeal No. 82 of 2001 and Criminal Revision, being Criminal Revision No. 359 of 2001 filed by the revisionist, Division Bench of this Court held Ashok Saxena guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and also held Yashpal Singh guilty of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.