IPC Section 307 — Attempt to murder

Judgments citing IPC Section 307

1. E. Jogaraju vs The State of Telangana on 06 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Jun 2023

   Case Name: E. Jogaraju vs The State of Telangana on 06 June, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 June, 2023 Bench: Smt. Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Law – Theft and Attempt to Cause Grievous Hurt Key Legal Propositions 1. Confessional statements made in police custody require careful scrutiny and corroboration, particularly when the circumstances surrounding the recovery of evidence are unclear. 2. Acquittal for a more serious charge (Section 307 IPC) necessitates extending the benefit of doubt for a lesser included offence (Section 394 IPC) based on the same set of facts and evidence. 3. Prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on solely the testimony of a single witness, particularly when contradicted by other evidence, is insufficient for conviction. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 26.08.2021 of the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, convicting the appellant under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case involved allegations of theft and causing injuries to the complainant, P.W.3, who was the appell

2. Dudepaka Chalapathi, @ Chalam & Domakonda Raju @ Raju vs The State on 31 July, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Dudepaka Chalapathi, @ Chalam & Domakonda Raju @ Raju vs The State on 31 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 July, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Attempt to Murder, Arms Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Credible eyewitness testimony, particularly from the injured witness, is sufficient to establish guilt even in the absence of corroborating evidence regarding motive. 2. A Test Identification Parade (TIP) is valid unless there is demonstrable irregularity in its procedure, and a bald statement by the accused regarding prior identification does not invalidate the proceedings. 3. A conviction based solely on the presence of an accused at the scene and possession of a weapon, without evidence of overt acts, is unsustainable, and benefit of doubt should be extended. Judgment Summary Background: The appellants were convicted for offences under Section 307 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), with A1 also convicted under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and A2 under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The case stemmed from an altercation where the appellants allegedly fired upon and injured P.W.2. The appel

3. Nyamathabad Chandrasekhar @ Shekar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 05 January, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana5 Jan 2023

   Case Name: Nyamathabad Chandrasekhar @ Shekar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 05 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 05 January, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Revision – Section 307 IPC – Reduction of Charge to Section 325 IPC – Bail Application Key Legal Propositions 1. The evidence of a consistent eyewitness and injured party (P.W.2) is reliable and should not be easily disregarded. 2. Hostility of a witness to material object recovery (P.W.6) does not necessarily dilute the prosecution’s case if corroborated by other evidence. 3. A conviction under Section 307 IPC can be altered to Section 325 IPC if the intention to cause death is not clearly established, and the act appears to be a result of a fight or altercation. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner/accused challenged the conviction under Section 307 IPC by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Bodhan, which was affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. The charges stemmed from an incident where the accused stabbed the complainant (P.W.2) multiple times following a dispute over a lease agreement for a butchering business. The petitioner sou

4. The State of Telangana vs M.A.Haseeb Khan & Anr. on 29 September, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Sept 2023

   Case Name: The State of Telangana vs M.A.Haseeb Khan & Anr. on 29 September, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 29 September, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Acquittal – Reversal of Acquittal – Appreciation of Evidence – Delay in Complaint – Spousal Disputes Key Legal Propositions 1. An appellate court reversing an acquittal must possess “very substantial and compelling reasons” and should be slow in interfering with a well-reasoned acquittal. 2. Compelling reasons for reversal include palpable errors of fact, erroneous legal interpretations, potential miscarriage of justice, illegal evidentiary approach, manifest injustice, or ignoring crucial evidence. 3. If two reasonable views are possible – one leading to acquittal and the other to conviction – the appellate court must favor the accused. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal is filed by the State of Telangana challenging the acquittal of the respondents/accused by the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in a case involving allegations of attempted murder, trespass, threats, and Arms Act violations. The defacto complainant alleged

5. Mohd Shahed vs The State Of A.P. on 20 January, 2014

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jan 2014

   Case Name: Mohd Shahed vs The State Of A.P. on 20 January, 2014 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 18 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Lakshman and Smt Justice P. Sree Sudha Subject: Criminal Appeal – Sexual Assault, Kidnapping, Attempt to Murder Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction can be sustained even without an identification parade, particularly when the victim had ample opportunity to observe the perpetrator in broad daylight. 2. Minor contradictions in witness testimonies do not necessarily invalidate a conviction, especially when corroborated by circumstantial evidence. 3. Proof of unlawful removal of a minor child from parental custody establishes the offence under Section 363 of the IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Mohd Shahed, was convicted by the trial court for offences including kidnapping (Section 363 IPC), attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC), and sexual assault (Section 376 IPC) of a 7-year-old victim. He appealed the conviction and sentence. Held: A. On Article/Issue: Identity of the Accused & Reliability of Identification Majority View: The Court upheld the conviction, finding that the vict

6. Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 28 March, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana28 Mar 2023

   Case Name: Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 28 March, 2023 Court: HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD Date of Judgment: 28 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice N. Tukaramji Subject: Criminal Appeal – Attempt to Murder (Section 307 IPC) – Injury Assessment – Intent Key Legal Propositions 1. To secure conviction under Section 307 IPC, intention to cause death must be established, even if death does not result. 2. The nature and location of injuries are crucial in determining the intent of the assailant; simple injuries, particularly not on vital organs, may not support a charge of attempt to murder. 3. Direct evidence of witnesses regarding the place of occurrence and manner of assault carries significant weight, outweighing inconsistencies in secondary evidence like wound certificates. Judgment Summary Background: The Appellant, Sreenu, appealed against a judgment of conviction and sentence dated 13.10.2010, wherein he was convicted under Sections 307 & 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for attacking victims with a knife. The incident occurred on the intervening night of 13/14.06.2008. Held: A. On Section 307 IPC (Attempt to Murder): Majority View: The Court fou

7. Mekala Bhumaiah vs The State Of Telangana on 29 August, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Aug 2023

   Case Name: Mekala Bhumaiah vs The State Of Telangana on 29 August, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana Date of Judgment: 29 August, 2023 Bench: Justice Nativarapu Rajeshwar Rao Subject: Criminal Revision, Section 307 IPC, Bail Application Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; discrepancies in evidence can create reasonable doubt. 2. Corroboration of witness testimony is crucial, particularly when key witnesses turn hostile or provide inconsistent accounts. 3. Ambiguity regarding the recovery of crucial evidence (M.O.1) can cast doubt on the prosecution's case and the integrity of the investigation. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Revision Case challenges the conviction and sentencing of the petitioner under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, affirmed by the Sessions Court. The petitioner was accused of attempting to murder PW8, allegedly hitting him with a stick portion of an axe. The prosecution relied on the testimony of several witnesses, including PWs 1-6, and the recovery of the alleged weapon (M.O.1). Held: A. On Conviction & Standard of Proof: Majority View: The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove th

8. Sama Subhash Reddy & Anr. vs State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 June, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana20 Jun 2023

   Case Name: Sama Subhash Reddy & Anr. vs State of Andhra Pradesh on 20 June, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 20 June, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Indian Penal Code – SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act – Assault – Sentence Reduction Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction under Section 324 IPC upheld where injuries were established and corroborated by medical evidence. 2. Acquittal under Sections 307 IPC and 3(1)(iv)(x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, not appealed by the State, remains valid. 3. Length of time elapsed since the incident (approximately 22 years) is a relevant factor in considering sentence reduction. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a judgment dated 23.02.2004 of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, convicting the appellants under Section 324 IPC and sentencing them to three months’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹3,000 each. The prosecution alleged that the appellants assaulted PWs 1 to 4 due to a land dispute. Held: A. On Conviction under Section 324 IPC: Majority View: The Court found no reason to set aside the conviction under Sec

9. K.Satyanarayana Singh, S/o K.Bhavani Singh vs The State Of A.P. on 06 October, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Oct 2023

   Case Name: K.Satyanarayana Singh vs The State Of A.P. on 06 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 October, 2023 Bench: Justice K. Lakshman & Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Sections 302, 307, 324 IPC, Section 149 IPC, Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on inconsistent evidence is improper. 2. Acquittal for a serious offence (Sections 302/307 IPC) does not automatically warrant acquittal for a lesser offence (Section 324 IPC) if sufficient evidence exists for the latter. 3. Corroboration of eyewitness testimony with independent evidence is crucial for establishing guilt. Judgment Summary Background: These appeals arise from a judgment convicting six accused under Section 324 r/w Section 149 IPC, after being acquitted of Sections 302 and 307 IPC. The charges stemmed from an altercation resulting in injuries to the complainant and the deceased, Yellam, who later succumbed to his injuries. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony and medical evidence. Held: A. On Sections 302/307 IPC (Appeal No. 805 of 2013 – filed by the complainant s

10. K. Surender vs The State of Telangana on 03 January, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana3 Jan 2023

    Case Name: K. Surender vs The State of Telangana on 03 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 03 January, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Law – Revision Petition – Abduction, Robbery, Arms Act – Test Identification – Concurrent Findings – Sentence Reduction Key Legal Propositions 1. Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts are generally not interfered with in revisional jurisdiction unless a patent illegality is apparent on the face of the record. 2. Identification evidence through Test Identification (TI) parade loses credibility if the witness was shown the accused prior to the parade. 3. Seizures already effected are inadmissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Revision Case arises from a conviction under Sections 341, 342, 366, 392 IPC, Section 307 IPC, and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act, affirmed by the Sessions Court. The petitioner/A2 challenges the conviction, primarily contesting the validity of the Test Identification parade and the admissibility of seized evidence. Held: A. On Test Identification & Witness Credibility: Majority View: The Court acknowledged the

11. 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

12. K.Satyanarayana Singh vs The State Of A.P. on 06 October, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana6 Oct 2023

    Case Name: K.Satyanarayana Singh vs The State Of A.P. on 06 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 06 October, 2023 Bench: Justice K. Lakshman & Justice K. Sujana Subject: Criminal Appeal – Sections 302, 307, 324 r/w 149 IPC – Acquittal & Conviction – Appreciation of Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. Conviction requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and cannot be based on assumptions or presumptions. 2. Evidence must be corroborated; a conviction cannot stand solely on the testimony of witnesses whose credibility has been discredited. 3. Acquittal for a more serious offence does not automatically warrant a conviction for a lesser offence if the evidence supporting the latter is insufficient. Judgment Summary Background: These appeals arise from a judgment dated 11.09.2013 in S.C. No. 314 of 2011, wherein the trial court convicted accused Nos. 1 to 6 for the offence under Section 324 r/w Section 149 of the IPC, while acquitting them of offences under Sections 307 and 302 r/w Section 149 of the IPC. Crl.A.No.805 of 2013 is filed by the defacto complainant against the acquittal for offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC. Crl.A.N

13. Union of India vs Petitioner on 10 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana10 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Union of India vs Petitioner on 10 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 10 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Lakshman Subject: Passport Renewal, Article 226 of the Constitution, Passports Act, 1967, Criminal Cases, Natural Justice Key Legal Propositions 1. Mere pendency of criminal cases is not a sufficient ground for refusing passport renewal under the Passports Act, 1967. 2. Passport renewal cannot be denied solely based on ongoing criminal investigations, especially if the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation and trial. 3. The principles laid down in *Vangala Kasturi Rangacharyulu v. Central Bureau of Investigation* regarding passport refusal for pending criminal appeals apply; conviction or a sentence of imprisonment for not less than two years is generally required. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 (Passport Officer) to renew their expired passport. The renewal application was rejected due to adverse police verification reports indicating the petitioner’s involvement in two criminal cases. The petitioner claimed false implication and submitted an

14. Md. Yakub Pasha Alias Noor Yakubmiya Mohammad & Ors. vs State of Telangana & Anr. on 02 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana2 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Md. Yakub Pasha Alias Noor Yakubmiya Mohammad & Ors. vs State of Telangana & Anr. on 02 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 02 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Section 482 Cr.P.C. Key Legal Propositions 1. High Courts possess inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. 2. Attendance of accused persons can be dispensed with during proceedings if represented by counsel, subject to conditions. 3. Courts are obligated to dispose of discharge applications (under Section 227 Cr.P.C.) on merits within a specified timeframe if filed before framing of charges. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 4 filed a Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings in S.C. No. 358 of 2022 pending before the III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Warangal. The allegations against them were under Sections 452, 307, 326 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Held: A. On Section 482 Cr.P.C. & Dispensation of Attendance: Majority View: The Court exercised its powers under Sectio

15. Nandru Prakash Rao vs The State of Telangana on 31 August, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana31 Aug 2023

    Case Name: Nandru Prakash Rao vs The State of Telangana on 31 August, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 31 August, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Rape, Assault Key Legal Propositions 1. Lack of corroborating medical evidence, specifically the absence of semen or spermatozoa in vaginal swabs and injuries to private parts, does not automatically negate a victim’s testimony regarding rape, but requires careful consideration alongside other evidence. 2. In cases involving victims with communication difficulties (deaf and dumb), the court must meticulously document observations regarding the manner in which the victim narrates the incident, particularly when relying on a translator. 3. While conclusive medical evidence of penetration is desirable, the presence of other injuries consistent with a struggle, such as bite marks and bruises, can be inferred as an attempt to commit rape, leading to a conviction for assault with intent to commit rape. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant, Nandru Prakash Rao, was convicted by the Special Sessions Judge for Fast-Tracking Cases Relating to Atrocities agai

16. Shaik Kamal Sha vs The State of Telangana on 29 March, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana29 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Shaik Kamal Sha vs The State of Telangana on 29 March, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 29 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Law – Attempt to Murder – Sentence Reduction – Dependency of Family Key Legal Propositions 1. The High Court possesses the power to reduce sentences imposed by lower courts, considering mitigating factors such as familial responsibilities and dependency. 2. The severity of injuries inflicted upon the victim is a crucial factor in determining the appropriate sentence for offences involving bodily harm. 3. Section 397 and 401 of CrPC provide the legal framework for filing a Criminal Revision against judgments of lower courts. Judgment Summary Background: The Criminal Revision Case arises from a challenge to the judgment of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Khammam, which affirmed the conviction and four-year sentence imposed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Khammam, on the petitioner under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The conviction stemmed from an incident where the petitioner attacked the complainant (P.W.2) after failing to repay a lo

17. Pandhre Kishan vs The State of Telangana on 13 February, 2023

    High Court of High Court for State of Telangana13 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Pandhre Kishan vs The State of Telangana on 13 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 13 February, 2023 Bench: Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha & Sri Justice A. Santhosh Reddy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 302 & 307 IPC, Culpable Homicide, Murder, Attempt to Murder Key Legal Propositions 1. The crucial element in determining the charge between murder (Section 302 IPC) and culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part II IPC) lies in establishing the intention of the accused at the time of the act. 2. For a conviction under Section 302 IPC, the prosecution must prove that the act was done with the intention of causing death, or with the intention or knowledge that the act was likely to cause death. 3. If the prosecution fails to establish the intent to cause death, but proves that the accused caused the death by an act likely to cause death with knowledge of that likelihood, the offence would fall under Section 304 Part II IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The appellant challenged the judgment of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases Under SCs/STs Act, Adilabad, convicting him under Sections 302 and 307 IPC f

18. Thiyyagura Rakesh Reddy vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 13 December, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh13 Dec 2023

    Case Name: Thiyyagura Rakesh Reddy vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 13 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Date of Judgment: 13 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. – Offenses under Sections 307, 324, and 498-A IPC – Compromise – Sentence Reduction. Key Legal Propositions 1. A conviction cannot be quashed solely on the basis of a compromise, particularly for non-compoundable offenses like Section 307 IPC. 2. Courts possess the discretion to reduce sentences in cases where a genuine compromise has been reached between parties, fostering peace and amity. 3. The acceptance of a compromise statement, coupled with verification of the parties’ identities and voluntariness, is a valid basis for considering sentence reduction. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal stemmed from a judgment dated 27.01.2016, convicting the appellant under Sections 324 and 307 IPC, and sentencing him to seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offense under Section 307 IPC, along with one year rigorous imprisonment for the offense under Section 324 IPC (sentences to run c

19. K.Sreenivasa Reddy vs The State on 13 December, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh13 Dec 2023

    Case Name: K.Sreenivasa Reddy vs The State on 13 December, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 13 December, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 307 & 326 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Medical Evidence – Consistency of Statements Key Legal Propositions 1. Ambiguity regarding the timing of statements (Ex.P1 & Ex.P2) recorded by the Magistrate and police, coupled with inconsistencies in the evidence, creates doubt regarding the genuineness of the prosecution's case. 2. Failure to produce wound certificates or examine doctors who initially treated the injured casts doubt on the nature and severity of the injuries sustained. 3. While the prosecution established the use of a weapon and identified the assailant, the lack of conclusive medical evidence regarding the grievous nature of the injuries necessitates a re-evaluation of the charge under Section 307 IPC. Judgment Summary Background: The Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Section 307 IPC by the IV Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Guntur, based on a charge sheet filed for offences punishable under Sections 307 and 326 IPC. The appellant chal

20. Kallam Kalyanapu Satyavathi vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 02 March, 2023

    High Court of Andhra Pradesh2 Mar 2023

    Case Name: Kallam Kalyanapu Satyavathi vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 02 March, 2023 Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Date of Judgment: 02 March, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu Subject: Criminal Appeal – Section 304 Part II, 304 Part II r/w 34, 307, 307 r/w 34 of I.P.C. Key Legal Propositions 1. Direct evidence, coupled with corroborating circumstances, is sufficient to establish guilt, even in the absence of conclusive motive. 2. Minor inconsistencies or lack of specific details in initial statements do not necessarily invalidate testimony if the core narrative remains consistent and believable. 3. Failure to prove every minute detail of an incident does not automatically lead to acquittal, particularly when the essential elements of the offence are established. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Sections 304 Part II and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants (A.1 and A.2) were found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and attempted murder, stemming from a dispute over ancestral property and a physical altercation resulting in the death of the deceased (sister of the Appellants) and injury