Conviction altered from Section 302 to 304 Part-II IPC as assault occurred during sudden intoxicated altercation.

The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC by the Sessions Judge, Sagar, for the murder of his father, Khuman Ahirwar

On August 19, 2022, the appellant, in an intoxicated state, entered into a verbal altercation with his mother and subsequently assaulted his father with kicks and fists

The complainant (the appellant's brother) and his mother fled to a relative’s house out of fear, returning the next morning to find the appellant sleeping with his feet on the deceased’s body

Medical evidence revealed multiple contusions and internal injuries to the liver and lungs, leading to cardiac arrest

The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing the incident was a sudden provocation without intent to kill

1. Whether the act of the appellant, committed in a state of intoxication during a sudden altercation with a family member, constitutes "Murder" under Section 302 or "Culpable Homicide not amounting to murder" under Section 304 of the IPC

2. Whether the lack of a deadly weapon and the absence of premeditation entitle the appellant to the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC

The Court applied Section 300 (Exception 4) of the IPC, which provides that culpable homicide is not murder if committed without premeditation in a sudden fight, in the heat of passion, and without the offender taking undue advantage or acting in a cruel manner

It further applied Section 304 Part II of the IPC regarding punishment for culpable homicide when the act is done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without specific intention to cause death

The Court observed that while the appellant’s presence at the scene was established, there were no direct eyewitnesses to the actual assault

The medical evidence confirmed death via internal organ failure due to blunt force, but the Court noted the absence of a deadly weapon or repeated blows suggestive of a "deliberate intention to cause death"

The Court reasoned that the incident was a "sudden quarrel" between a son and father triggered by the appellant's intoxication, devoid of prior planning or premeditation

Since the assault occurred in the "heat of passion" and the appellant did not act in an unusually cruel manner, the Court determined that the legal requirements for "Murder" were not met, but the "knowledge" of the likelihood of death was present

The Court held that the case falls under Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC and altered the conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC

The sentence of Life Imprisonment was modified to 10 years of Rigorous Imprisonment (R.I.) and a fine of Rs. 10,000, with an additional six months R.I. in case of default