KESAR SINGH & ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2008] 6 S.C.R. 1196 · Decided: 29-04-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 6 S.C.R. 1196 
A 
KESAR SINGH & ANR. 
V. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 754 of 2008) 
B 
APRIL 29, 2008 
(S.B. SINHA AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.) 
Penal Code, 1860: 
c 
s.304 (part-/)- Single injury on head ~fvictim- Resulting 
in his death -
HELO: Both the accused were guilty of 
commission of offence punishable u/s 304 (Part-/) -Conviction 
by both the courts below upheld - However, on facts, sentence 
modified. 
D 
s. 304 - Distinction between first part and second part of 
s. 304 - Explained. 
1 
s. 299 and s. 300 - 'Culpable homicide' not amounting 
to murder' and 'culpable homicide amounting to murder' -
Distinction between - Explained - Comparison of provisions 
E ss. 299 and 300 made. 
s.299 -
Expressions 'intention' and 'knowledge' -
Distinction between - Explained. 
Words and Phrases: 
F 
Expressions 'knowledge' and 'intention' - Connotation of 
in the context of ss.299 and 300 /PC. 
Expressions 'fight', 'provocation' in the context of s.300 
/PC - Connotation of. 
G 
The appellants were prosecuted for causing death 
of the father of PW 1. The case of prosecution was that 
on the day of incident when the accused started digging 
" 
foundation in the vacant land in their possession and in 
H 
1196 
KESAR SINGH & ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA 
1197 
front of the house of father of PW 1, the latter asked them A 
to leave some passage for his house. A-2 then exhorted 
that the objector be taught a lesson, whereupon A-1 gave 
a spade blow with its reverse side on the head of the father 
of PW 1 as a result of which he fell down. After a few a 
days' hospitalization, the victim succumbed to his injuries. B 
The trial court convicted both the accused u/s 304 (part-I) 
IPC and sentenced appellant no.1 to rigorous 
imprisonment for eight years and appellant No.2 to five 
years. On appeal by the accused, the High Court affirmed 
the conviction and the sentences. 
c 
In the instant appeal filed by the accused it was 
contended for the appellants that merely a single blow 
with reverse side of the spade was said to have been 
inflicted on the victim in a sudden fight and, as such, the 
case would fall u/s 304 (part-II) and not u/s 304 (part-I) IPC, D 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The distinction between culpable 
homicide amounting to murder and not amounting to 
murde_r is well known. Culpable homicide is genus, E 
murder is its specie. The culpable homicide, excluding 
the special characteristics of murder, would amount to 
culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The Code 
recognizes three degrees of culpable homicide. When a 
culpable homicide is 6f the first degree, it comes within 
F 
the purview of the definition of Section 300 and it will 
amount to murder. The second de·gree of culpable 
homicide becomes punishable in the first part of Section 
304. Then there is culpable homicide. of third. degree which 
is the least sic!e of culpable homicide and the punishment G 
provided for is also the lowest among the punishments 
for the three grades. It is punishable under the second 
part of Section 304. ( para 11) [1205-D-F] 
1.2 When the court is beset with a question as to 
whether the offence is murder or culpable homicide not H 
1198 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 6 S.C.R. 
A amounting to murder, the fact involved must be examined 
having regard to :(1) whether the accused has done an 
act which caused the death of another; (2) if a causal 
connection is found between the act of the deceased and 
the death, the relevant question would be whether the act 
8 of the accused amounts to culpable homicide as defined 
in Section 299; and (3) if the answer thereto again is found 
to be in affirmative, the question would be whether in the 
facts of the case, Section 300 or any of the exceptions 
contained therein would be attracted. (para 12) [1206-8-D] 
c 
1.3 Culpable homicide may be classified in three 
categories - (1) in which death is caused by the doing of 
an act with the intention of causing death; (2) when it is 
committed by causing death with the intention of causing 
such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; and (3) where 
0 
the death is caused by an act done with the knowledge 
that such act is likely to cause death. (para 14) [1206-G-H; 
1207-A] 
2.1 'Knowledge' and 'intention' should not be 
confused. Section 299 IPC in defining first two categories 
E does not deal with the knowledge whereas it does in 
relation to the third category. It would also be relevant to 
bear 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.