IPC Section 304 — Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder

Judgments citing IPC Section 304

1. Gandi Kondalu vs The State of A.P. on 20 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Gandi Kondalu vs The State of A.P. on 20 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 304 Part II IPC – Reduction of Sentence Key Legal Propositions 1. Eyewitness testimony, when consistent, can be relied upon to establish the facts of an incident, even in the absence of corroborating evidence. 2. A defense of accidental fall cannot be accepted when contradicted by credible eyewitness accounts. 3. Courts may exercise discretion to reduce sentences based on the specific circumstances of a case, even while upholding a conviction. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Gandi Kondalu, was convicted by the Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, for the offence under Section 304-Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-. The appeal before the High Court challenged this conviction, arguing discrepancies in witness statements and claiming the death resulted from an accidental fall during a drunken state. The prosecution maintained the appellant inflicted blows on the deceased, leading to his

2. Mohd. Gulam Rasool vs State of Telangana on 16 March, 2011

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana16 Mar 2011

   Case Name: Mohd. Gulam Rasool vs State of Telangana on 16 March, 2011 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 23 September, 2023 Bench: Justice K. Lakshman and Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 302 IPC – Murder – Dying Declaration – Culpable Homicide Key Legal Propositions 1. A dying declaration, while a crucial piece of evidence, must be assessed for reliability and consistency with other evidence on record. 2. Conviction under Section 302 IPC requires proof of intention to kill, and circumstantial evidence must establish this beyond reasonable doubt. 3. In cases of quarrel leading to homicide, the court must consider if the act was committed in the heat of passion or with premeditation, potentially leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Mohd. Gulam Rasool, was convicted by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court), Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC (murder) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The appeal arises from the judgment dated 16.03.2011 in S.C.No. 505 of 2010. The prosecution’s case was that the

3. K. Narasimha vs The State of Telangana on 07 July, 2015

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Jul 2015

   Case Name: Criminal Appeal No.747 of 2015 Court: The High Court of Telangana Date of Judgment: 05 January, 2023 (as indicated in the final order, though judgment was delivered earlier) Bench: Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Hon'ble Smt Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Law – Murder – Section 302 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Reduction of Charge to Section 304 Part II IPC. Key Legal Propositions 1. A single injury, even if caused by a dangerous weapon, may not establish an intention to cause death, potentially leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302 IPC. 2. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had the intention or knowledge that their actions would likely cause death to secure a conviction under Section 302 IPC. 3. The testimony of a close relative, even against their own family member, can be considered reliable evidence if not discredited through cross-examination. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant was convicted by the Special Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, for the offence of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) based on the death of his wife, caused by an axe injury. T

4. Andyarragani Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Andyarragani Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Reduction of Sentence – Grave and Sudden Provocation – Indian Penal Code Sections 304-Part I, 509, 325 Key Legal Propositions 1. Grave and sudden provocation can be a mitigating factor in sentencing for offences under the Indian Penal Code, even if it does not amount to complete exemption from liability. 2. The severity of the sentence can be reduced considering the circumstances of the offence, including the act of provocation and the nature of the injury caused. 3. Courts have the discretion to modify sentences based on considerations of justice and equity, particularly when the appellant has dependents. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Sections 325, 509, and 304-Part I of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant/Accused was found guilty of causing the death of the deceased after an altercation following an initial incident of misbehavior towards PW1. The trial court sentenced him to imprisonment and fine

5. Emni Pedda Gangaram & Ors. vs The State of A.P. on 13 December, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana13 Dec 2023

   Case Name: Emni Pedda Gangaram (A-1) & Ors. vs The State of A.P. on 13 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 13 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Smt Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder – Section 302/34 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Juvenile Justice Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction based solely on eyewitness testimony requires careful scrutiny, particularly regarding consistency and potential for bias. 2. Evidence establishing a homicide, coupled with proof of the accused’s presence and knowledge, may not necessarily establish the intent required for a conviction under Section 302 IPC, potentially reducing the charge to Section 304 Part-I IPC. 3. The provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, supersede other penal provisions when an accused is found to be a juvenile at the time of the offense, mandating a maximum sentence of three years. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment of the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Bodhan, convicting appellants 1-3 under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of C

6. Telugu Gopal & Ors. vs The State of Telangana on 13 December, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana13 Dec 2023

   Case Name: Telugu Gopal & Ors. vs The State of Telangana on 13 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 13 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Smt. Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder – Section 302 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Alteration of Conviction Key Legal Propositions 1. To establish murder under Section 302 IPC, the prosecution must prove the accused’s intention or knowledge as defined in clauses of Section 300 IPC. 2. A distinction exists between culpable homicide and murder, with the former not amounting to murder if it falls within the exceptions to Section 300 IPC. 3. When a single injury results in death, the court must infer whether the accused had the intention to cause death or an injury likely to cause death, considering factors like the weapon used, body part injured, and circumstances surrounding the incident. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal challenges a judgment dated 17th October 2014, convicting the appellants (A1, A2, and A4) for offences under Sections 101 and 302 IPC, stemming from a scuffle that resulted in the death of the deceased, allegedly due to a dispute o

7. The State of Telangana vs. Yengarigala Yadaiah & Anr. on 20 December, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Dec 2023

   Case Name: The State of Telangana vs. Yengarigala Yadaiah & Anr. on 20 December, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Smt. Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Criminal Law – Murder – Dowry Harassment – Dying Declaration – Appreciation of Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. A conviction under Section 302 IPC requires proof of intent to cause death, while Section 304 Part II IPC applies when the act is done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without intent. 2. A dying declaration, recorded in accordance with legal procedures and supported by evidence of the declarant’s conscious state, can be a reliable basis for conviction. 3. While evidence of dowry harassment may be lacking in certain testimonies, it can be substantiated by the dying declaration and other corroborating evidence. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment convicting the appellants/accused under Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of the deceased, allegedly due to dowry harassment. The trial court sentenced them to life imprisonment and a fi

8. Chilla @ Pastham Yakalaxmi vs The State of Telangana on 17 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana17 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Chilla @ Pastham Yakalaxmi vs The State of Telangana on 17 November, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 17 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 374 Cr.P.C – Conviction under Sections 304, Part-II IPC – SC/ST (POA) Act – Reduction of Sentence Key Legal Propositions 1. In cases of domestic violence and continuous abuse, the prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally caused the death of the deceased, and not merely acted in self-defense or in the heat of the moment. 2. Section 106 of the Evidence Act places the burden on the accused to explain circumstances surrounding the death if they were present at the scene. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation can be considered by the court. 3. The court may consider mitigating factors, such as the welfare of the children of the accused, when determining the appropriate sentence, even after conviction. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction by the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/STs (POA) Act-cum-VII Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal,

9. S Saibaba Qoud (Died) & Ors. vs Palle Trishulnath Goud & Ors. on 22 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Nov 2023

   Case Name: S Saibaba Qoud (Died) & Ors. vs Palle Trishulnath Goud & Ors. on 22 November, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal, Dowry Harassment, Section 304 IPC, Acquittal Key Legal Propositions 1. A victim or their legal heir can prefer an appeal against acquittal under Section 372 CrPC, provided they meet the definition of 'victim' under Section 2(w) CrPC. 2. An order of acquittal should not be lightly disturbed; compelling reasons are required to reverse it, particularly when the trial court's view is a possible one based on the evidence. 3. The appellate court must give due weight to the findings of the trial court and should only interfere if the trial court’s conclusion on facts is palpably wrong, based on an erroneous law, or manifestly unjust. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from the acquittal of respondents/accused by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri, in S.C. No. 381 of 2014. The charges were under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the IPC, relating to dowry harassment and death. The appellant, representing the de

10. Crtte Rajaiah vs The State of Telangana on 07 June, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Jun 2023

    Case Name: Crtte Rajaiah vs The State of Telangana on 07 June, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 07 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code – Conviction under Section 304 II of Indian Penal Code – Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder – Evidence – Ownership of Land – Electricity Connection – Corroboration. Key Legal Propositions 1. A conviction under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code requires sufficient evidence beyond a statement made by the accused, and corroboration is essential. 2. The prosecution must establish not only the act of providing electricity to the fencing but also ownership of the land and the connection between the act and the resulting death. 3. A delay in lodging a complaint, without reasonable explanation, raises doubt regarding the prosecution's case, particularly when the police were present at the scene of the incident. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction recorded by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, in S.C.No. 338 of 2019, dated 26.03.2021, for offences punishabl

11. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Chavan Jayamma & Ors on 20 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Dec 2023

    Case Name: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Chavan Jayamma & Ors on 20 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 December, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Workmen’s Compensation Act – Appeal against award – Employer-employee relationship – Coverage under Insurance Policy – Validity of Driving License. Key Legal Propositions 1. Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act limits appeals to substantial questions of law, not a re-evaluation of facts. 2. If an employer secures insurance covering employees (including those loading/unloading), the insurer is liable for compensation, even if the premium isn’t explicitly itemized. 3. A driver holding a Light Motor Vehicle license can also operate a goods vehicle, particularly if the weight falls within the permitted limits, as per established precedent. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from an award passed by the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation directing payment of compensation to the dependents of a labourer (Chavan Narayana) who died in an accident while travelling on a lorry. The Insurance Company (Appellant) challenges the a

12. The New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Godugu Pullamma on 07 November, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Nov 2023

    Case Name: The New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Godugu Pullamma on 07 November, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 07 November, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Workmen’s Compensation Act, Insurance Policy, Employer-Employee Relationship Key Legal Propositions 1. An insurance policy covering a goods-carrying vehicle extends to labourers employed for loading and unloading, particularly when an additional premium is paid for employee coverage. 2. The term ‘employee’ in an insurance policy should be construed broadly to include those engaged in activities related to the operation and maintenance of the vehicle, including loading and unloading. 3. The insurer must adduce evidence to disprove the employer-employee relationship or coverage under the policy; merely asserting a breach of conditions is insufficient. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from an order dated 14.09.2009 in a Workmen’s Compensation case. The appellant, The New India Assurance Company Limited, challenges the award of compensation to the respondent, Godugu Pullamma, for the death of her son, who was allegedly employed as

13. Smt. Shaik Fareeda & Smt. Hazi Begum vs The State of Telangana on 04 April, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana4 Apr 2023

    Case Name: Smt. Shaik Fareeda & Smt. Hazi Begum vs The State of Telangana on 04 April, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 04 April, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice M. Laxman & Smt Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder/Culpable Homicide – Right of Private Defence – Section 302/304 IPC Key Legal Propositions 1. An act done in exercise of the right of private defence, even if excessive, may not constitute murder under Section 302 IPC but may fall under Section 304 Part II IPC. 2. The prosecution must establish that the attack was not in exercise of the right of private defence. 3. Evidence corroborating the defence of private defence, even if not direct evidence of the incident, is relevant for consideration. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, convicting the appellants (Accused Nos. 1 & 2) for offences under Sections 302 and 302 read with 34 of the IPC, sentencing them to life imprisonment for the death of the deceased, who was the husband of Appellant No. 1 and son-in-law of Appellant No. 2. The prosecution alleged

14. Kedewar Ramesh vs The State of Telangana on 06 December 2017

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Dec 2017

    Case Name: Kedewar Ramesh vs The State of Telangana on 06 December 2017 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 October 2023 Bench: Smt Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 304 Part II IPC – Domestic Violence – Husband’s conviction – Evidence assessment – Sentence reduction. Key Legal Propositions 1. The prosecution must establish the ingredients of Section 304 Part II IPC beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Evidence of witnesses, even if partially hostile, can be considered if it corroborates the prosecution's case. 3. Under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, the accused has a burden to explain circumstances surrounding the death of the deceased, particularly when the incident occurred within the confines of their home. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 06.12.2017 of the Principal Sessions Judge, Adilabad, convicting the appellant under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the death of his wife. The trial court sentenced him to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing insufficient evidence

15. Gundampalli Ramulu vs The State of Telangana on 31 October, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Gundampalli Ramulu vs The State of Telangana on 31 October, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 October, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 304 Part II IPC – Apprehension of guilt – Lack of direct nexus between injury and cause of death. Key Legal Propositions 1. The prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt a direct or consequential nexus between the accused’s actions and the victim’s cause of death. 2. Conviction under Section 304-II IPC requires proof that the accused’s actions directly resulted in the death, and mere injury is insufficient. 3. In the absence of expert testimony linking the injury caused by the accused to the specific cause of death (Subarachnoid Hemorrhage), conviction under Section 304-II or 304-A IPC is unsustainable. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Section 304-II of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant/Accused was found guilty of causing the death of the deceased by beating him. The trial court, while acknowledging the absence of intent to cause death, convicted the Appellant under Section 304-II I

16. Chakali Mallesh @ Midarapu Mallesh vs The State Of A. P. on 07 July, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana7 Jul 2023

    Case Name: Chakali Mallesh @ Midarapu Mallesh vs The State Of A. P. on 07 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 07 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Law – Section 302/304 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Reduction of Sentence Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction under Section 304 IPC can be sustained based on consistent eyewitness testimony, even in the absence of corroborating evidence, and the failure to immediately report the incident to police does not automatically discredit such testimony. 2. Post-mortem reports detailing multiple contusions and fractures, even if not constituting grievous injuries on vital organs, can support a conviction for causing hurt leading to death. 3. While appellate courts generally refrain from interfering with convictions based on evidence, they retain the discretion to reduce sentences deemed disproportionate to the offence. Judgment Summary Background: The Appellant challenged the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, which convicted him under Section 304 IPC for causing the death of the deceased, after initially being charged under Sect

17. Syed Illias vs The State of AP on 04 July, 2011

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana4 Jul 2011

    Case Name: Syed Illias vs The State of AP on 04 July, 2011 & The State of AP vs Syed Mohinuddin on 04 July, 2011 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 14 March, 2023 Bench: Justice M.L.N. (Man) and Justice G.Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Murder/Culpable Homicide – Section 302/304 IPC – Common Intention – Appreciation of Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. The medical evidence establishing a grievous injury sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature supports a finding of murder, and the trial court erred in convicting for a lesser offense without considering the intent. 2. The credibility of eyewitness testimony is paramount, and discrepancies in the FIR regarding specific details of the assault do not necessarily invalidate the evidence if corroborated by other reliable testimony. 3. Establishing common intention amongst accused requires more than mere presence at the scene of the crime; there must be evidence of a shared plan or active participation in the offense. Judgment Summary Background: These criminal appeals arise from a conviction and acquittal in S.C.No.730 of 2007. Accused No.1 was convi

18. The Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Gadamshetty Leelavathi & Ors. on 14 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana14 Dec 2023

    Case Name: The Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Company Ltd. vs. Gadamshetty Leelavathi & Ors. on 14 December, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 14 December, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice M.G. Priyadarsini Subject: Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 – Liability of Insurance Company – Coverage of Cleaner – Substantial Question of Law Key Legal Propositions 1. An insurance policy covering a passenger vehicle, even if a ‘package/comprehensive’ policy, may extend coverage to a cleaner if an additional premium is paid for covering additional workmen. 2. If the terms of an insurance policy are clear and unambiguous, they shall prevail over the amount of premium collected, even if the premium collected is less than prescribed. 3. Appeals under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 are limited to substantial questions of law and do not function as a first appeal on both facts and law. Judgment Summary Background: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal arises from a judgment dated 18.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation, Karimnagar, awarding compensation to the claimant for the death of her husband, a

19. Shaik HyderAli vs The State of Telangana on 15 December, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana15 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Shaik HyderAli vs The State of Telangana on 15 December, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 15 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K.Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C – Conviction under Sections 304 part-III/34 & 404 IPC – Suspension of Sentence – Circumstantial Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires fulfillment of the ‘Panchsheel’ principles, including establishing consistent circumstances pointing solely to the guilt of the accused, excluding all other hypotheses. 2. Circumstantial evidence must be of a conclusive nature and tendency, forming a complete chain of evidence leaving no reasonable ground for innocence. 3. Acquaintance, being last seen together, and seizure of material objects can form the basis of a conviction when supported by other conclusive evidence, but are insufficient on their own. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 01.04.2022 of the Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, convicting the Appellant/Accused No.1 under Sections 304 part-III/34 & 404 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the dea

20. A. Vara Laxmi vs. V. Markandeyulu on 22 September, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana22 Sept 2023

    Case Name: A. Vara Laxmi vs. V. Markandeyulu on 22 September, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 22 September, 2023 Bench: Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao Subject: Motor Accident Claims Key Legal Propositions 1. In motor accident claim cases, the Tribunal can consider the actual income of the deceased, supported by evidence like salary certificates, rather than relying solely on notional income, especially when no contrary evidence is presented. 2. Contributory negligence can be apportioned based on the specific facts and evidence presented, including instances of triple riding and rash driving. 3. Insurance companies can be held liable even if the driver did not possess a valid license, provided sufficient evidence of the lack of license is not presented by the insurer. Judgment Summary Background: These are Motor Accident Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arising from an award dated 25.06.2014 concerning a motor vehicle accident resulting in the death of A. Lova Raju. MACMA No. 3943 of 2014 was filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, while MACMA No. 4264 of 2014 was filed by the insurance company challenging the award. The c