LexPOSURAM DESHMUKH versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 5 S.C.R. 807 POSURAM DESHMUKH A II. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH (Criminal Appeal No. 697 of 2009) • APRIL 9, 2009 B [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR GANGUL Y, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: c s. 304, Part I - Sudden quarrel - Armed assault causing death - Conviction uls.302 by trial court - Upheld by High Court - Propriety of - Held: Not proper - Conviction altered to uls.304 Part I with custodialsentence of 10 years. s.300, Exception 4 - Applicability of,· points of distinction D ~ and similarities with Exception 1 - Discussed. Words and Phrases - 'sudden fight', 'undue advantage' and 'unfair advantage' - Meaning of. According to the prosecution, PW 1 and her father- E in-law were in their agricultural field trying to block the course of water when accused-appellant alongwith a co- accused came there and tried to stop them, on which an altercation ensued between the parties. The appellant F who was armed with a 'chatwar' (a stick fitted with a square iron plate at the end) and the co-accused who 'l\; was armed with a lathi assaulted the father-in-law of PW1 ,.. and caused injuries on his body which proved fatal. The Trial court convicted the appellant under s.302 rlw s.34 G IPC. The High Court did not accept the stand taken by ~ the appellant that the incident had taken place in course -1, of sudden quarrel and upheld the order passed by the trial Court. 807 H 808 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R. A In appeal to this Court, it was contended that even if the prosecution version was accepted in its totality, case under s.302 IPC was not made out. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court B HELD: 1.1. For bringing in operation of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC it has to be established that the act was committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel without the offender having taken undue advantage and not having c acted in a cruel or unusual manner. [Para 6] [812-E-F] 1.2. The Fourth Exception of Section 300, IPC covers acts done in a sudden fight. The said exception deals with a case of prosecution not covered by the first D exception, after which its place would have been more appropriate. The exception is founded upon the same principle, for in both there is absence of premeditation. But, while in the case of Exception 1 there is total deprivation of self-control, in case of Exception 4, there E is only that heat of passion which clouds men's sober reasons and urges them to deeds which they would not otherwise do. There is provocation in Exception 4 as in Exception 1; but the injury done is not the direct consequence of that provocation. In fact Exception 4 F deals with cases in which notwithstanding that a blow may have been struck, or some provocation given in the origin of the dispute or in whatever way the quarrel may have originated, yet the subsequent conduct of both parties puts them in respect of guilt upon equal footing. . .. ~ G [Para 7] [812-F-H; 813-A-B] 1.3. A 'sudden fight' implies mutual provocation and blows on each side. The homicide committed is· then • clearly not traceable to unilateral provocation, nor in such cases could the whole blame be placed on one side. For H if it were so, the Exception more appropriately applicable POSURAM DESHMUKH v. STATE OF CHHATIISGARH 809 j would be Exception 1. There is no previous deliberation A or determination to fight. A fight suddenly takes place, for which both parties are more or less to be blamed. It may be that one of them starts it, but if the other had not aggravated it by his own conduct it would not have taken ., the serious turn it did. There is then mutual provocation B and aggravation, and it is difficult to apportion the share of blame which attaches to each fighter. The help of Exception 4 can be invoked if death is caused (a) without premeditation, (b) in a sudden fight; (c) without the offender's having taken undue advantage or acted in a c cruel or unusual manner; and (d) the fight must have been with the person killed. To bring a case within Exception 4 all the ingredients mentioned in it must be found. It is to be noted that the 'fight' occurring in Exception 4 to Section 300, IPC is not defined in the IPC. D It takes two to make a fight. Heat of passion requires that there must be no time for the passions to cool down and in this case, the parties had worked themselves into a fury on account of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.