Village-Fair Quarrel: Karnataka HC Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide, Citing No Intent To Kill; Accused Gets Time Served, Rs1 Lakh Goes To Widow

On 1 January 2016, during a village discussion about liquor sales at a fair, the appellant quarrelled with Gurappa, assaulted him with his hands and a stone, and kicked him.

Gurappa received treatment at several hospitals and died on 15 January 2016. His statement was recorded on 5 January 2016, and the appellant was later charged under Sections 302 and 504 IPC.

The Sessions Court convicted him under both provisions and imposed life imprisonment for murder.

In appeal, the appellant challenged the reliability of related eyewitnesses, the delay in reporting, and the causal link between the assault and death.

The High Court considered the eyewitness and medical evidence, including the post-mortem finding that death resulted from fracture-dislocation of a cervical vertebra due to blunt-force trauma.

The Court considered Sections 302, 304 Part II, and 504 of the IPC.

It distinguished murder from culpable homicide not amounting to murder on the basis of the appellant’s mental state in the circumstances of the assault: it found no intention to cause death, but held that the appellant acted with knowledge that his conduct could cause injuries resulting in death.

The Court also held that relationship to the deceased, by itself, was not a reason to disbelieve eyewitness testimony.

The Court accepted the account of the deceased’s statement and the testimony of PWs 4–7, noting that the witnesses had withstood cross-examination and that their relationship to the deceased did not, without more, render their evidence unreliable.

It found the reporting delay explained in the deceased’s statement and considered the evidence of treatment and the post-mortem findings in assessing causation.

However, the quarrel arose without prior animosity or premeditation; the appellant first used his hands and kicked the deceased, and then used a stone lying on the ground.

In those circumstances, the Court found that the assault was not committed with an intention to cause death, but with knowledge that it could result in fatal injury. It therefore held that the offence fell under Section 304 Part II, rather than Section 302 IPC.

The appellant was sentenced to the period already undergone and directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 within 30 days, with one year’s simple imprisonment in default.

The fine was directed to be paid to PW.4, the deceased’s wife, as compensation, subject to deduction of any fine already deposited.