A slap without knowledge that the resulting injury was likely fatal amounts to grievous hurt, not culpable homicide.

The prosecution alleged that, during a quarrel, the appellant slapped the deceased, who fell and sustained a fatal head injury.

PW1 was the eyewitness; the post-mortem evidence recorded a forehead injury and skull fracture.

The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 304(II) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), rather than the charged offence under Section 302, and sentenced him to two years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine.

On appeal, the appellant did not seriously dispute his involvement but argued that the facts disclosed, at most, an offence under Section 323 IPC.

1. Whether the appellant’s act, in the circumstances proved, amounted to culpable homicide under Section 304(II) IPC.

2. If not, whether the act constituted an offence under Section 325 IPC for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.

The Court considered Sections 302, 304(II), 325 and 323 IPC.

Section 304(II) applies where an act causing death is done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without the intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

Section 325 concerns voluntarily causing grievous hurt, while Section 323 concerns voluntarily causing hurt.

The Court also referred to Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for setting off any period of imprisonment already undergone.

The Court accepted PW1’s cogent and unshaken evidence that the appellant slapped the deceased, and found that the medical evidence established a grievous head injury, including a skull fracture.

However, the act was unpremeditated and followed the deceased’s intervention in a quarrel.

The Court found no evidence that the appellant intended to cause death or an injury likely to cause death, or knew that his act was likely to cause death; it therefore held that culpable homicide under Section 304(II) was not established.

Because the slap caused the deceased to fall and sustain grievous hurt, the Court held that Section 325, rather than Section 323, applied.

The conviction and sentence under Section 304(II) IPC were set aside, and the appellant was convicted under Section 325 IPC.

He was sentenced to six months’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹1,10,000, with six months’ simple imprisonment in default.

Upon payment, ₹1,00,000 was directed to be paid to the deceased’s wife as compensation; any period already undergone was to be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C.