Sudden altercation without premeditation warrants altering conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part-I IPC.

On 22.05.2022, the deceased, Itwar Singh Gond, was found with severe head and back injuries in the courtyard of the appellant’s residence

The deceased had been called to the house by the appellant earlier that night

He succumbed to his injuries during treatment at the District Hospital

Following the appellant's arrest on 23.05.2022, a memorandum statement led to the recovery of a wooden stick (the weapon of offence) and blood-stained clothing

The trial court, relying on circumstantial evidence and medical reports, convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to life imprisonment

The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and that the act, if proven, did not amount to murder

1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the death of Itwar Singh was homicidal in nature?

2. Whether the prosecution proved that the appellant caused the homicidal death, and if so, whether the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC warrants interference or alteration to Section 304 of the IPC?

The Court applied Section 300 (Exception 4) of the IPC, which reduces murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder if committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion

Section 27 of the Evidence Act regarding the admissibility of facts discovered pursuant to an accused's statement

Section 106 of the Evidence Act, which places the burden of proving facts especially within the knowledge of a person upon that person

The Court followed the guidelines in Anbazhagan v. The State (2023) to distinguish between the "intention" required for murder and the "knowledge" or "intention" associated with Section 304 IPC

The Court confirmed the homicidal nature of death through the postmortem report (Ex. P/15), which detailed a parietal bone fracture and internal cranial bleeding caused by a hard, blunt object

The "last seen" circumstance was established through testimony that the appellant summoned the deceased to his house

Applying Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the Court noted the appellant’s failure to explain how the deceased sustained fatal injuries within his exclusive courtyard

Scientific evidence (FSL report Ex. P/33) confirmed human blood on the recovered wooden stick and the appellant’s clothes, completing the circumstantial chain

The Court observed that the incident occurred during a sudden altercation without prior enmity or premeditation

The use of a single blow with a wooden stick (an object readily available at the spot) indicated an absence of calculated intent to kill, thereby satisfying the criteria for Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC

The High Court set aside the conviction under Section 302 IPC and altered it to Section 304 Part-I IPC

The sentence of life imprisonment was reduced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment, while the fine imposed by the trial court was maintained

The appeal was allowed in part