Sudden quarrel without premeditation attracts Section 304(ii), not murder under Section 302 IPC.

The appellant and the deceased were migrant workers residing in the same room at the premises of Bluemoon Industries. They frequently quarrelled, and P.W.1, their supervisor, had previously intervened to pacify them.

On 7 September 2020, a quarrel arose between them over bringing pickle for lunch. The deceased allegedly abused the appellant in vulgar language, following which the appellant caught hold of his neck and punched him on the chest. P.Ws.1 to 3 witnessed the incident and found the deceased unconscious; he was taken to the hospital, where he was declared dead.

The post-mortem examination recorded several scratch abrasions and a contusion on the thyrohyoid muscle. The hyoid bone and thyroid cartilage were intact. The medical officer ultimately opined that death was due to injury to the neck.

The appellant was charged under Section 302 IPC and convicted by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, who sentenced him to imprisonment for life and imposed a fine of Rs.2,000.

He preferred the present appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., contending that the incident occurred during a sudden quarrel and attracted Section 304(ii) IPC rather than Section 302 IPC.

Whether the appellant’s act of catching the deceased by the neck and punching him during a sudden quarrel constituted murder punishable under Section 302 IPC?

Whether the facts established Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, thereby reducing the offence to culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under Section 304(ii) IPC?

Whether the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed by the trial Court required modification?

The Court applied Section 302 IPC, which prescribes punishment for murder, and Section 304(ii) IPC, which applies where culpable homicide is committed with knowledge that the act is likely to cause death but without intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

It relied on Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, under which culpable homicide is not murder if the act is committed without premeditation, in a sudden fight, in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel, and without the offender taking undue advantage or acting in a cruel or unusual manner.

The appeal was considered under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., which permits an appeal against conviction by a Sessions Court.

The Court accepted the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 that the incident arose from a petty dispute during lunch and escalated after the deceased used abusive language towards the appellant’s mother.

The appellant was 19 years old and the deceased was 17; the attack occurred spontaneously, without premeditation, and was carried out only with the appellant’s hands. No weapon was used, and the appellant did not take undue advantage or continue the assault after the deceased became unconscious.

Although the deceased died from pressure or injury to the neck, the medical evidence disclosed no other serious injury and was not considered conclusive as to an intentional homicidal act.

Applying Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, the Court held that the occurrence took place during a sudden quarrel and in the heat of passion. The requisite intention for murder under Section 302 IPC was therefore not established, though the appellant had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death, attracting Section 304(ii) IPC.

The conviction was accordingly altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304(ii) IPC. The sentence of life imprisonment was modified to five years’ imprisonment.

The criminal appeal was allowed in part, and the connected miscellaneous petition for suspension of sentence was closed.