Murder; Exception IV of Section 300 IPC and Culpable Homicide

The appeal before the Supreme Court was preferred agrieved by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay's order confirming the Trial Court's conviction of the appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), for the murder of Motiram Deoram Achat.

The matter stemmed from an incident on 15th July 2009, stemming from a dispute over the use of a common boundary between adjacent agricultural fields owned by the deceased and the co-accused (the appellant's father). During a confrontation, the appellant, armed with a stick, and the co-accused, armed with an axe, assaulted the deceased and the complainant (deceased's son). The deceased succumbed to his injuries later that night, leading to the charge of murder.

The Apex Court observed that the eyewitnesses were family members of the deceased, pointing out that though their statement must be scrutinized with care, it cannot be rejected just on this ground. Though agreeing with the trial courts that the deceased was killed by the appellant and co-accused, the Supreme Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish the offence to be under Section 302 IPC.

The Court emphasized that the weapons employed were a stick and the blunt side of an axe, easily found in farms, indicating there was no premeditation. Additionally, the extent of the injuries and the evidence did not show that the appellant had behaved cruelly or taken excessive advantage. Viewing the likelihood of an instant conflict in the fury of the moment because of former animosity, the Supreme Court held that the case came within Exception IV to Section 300 of IPC. Consequently, the appellant was sentenced to the period already undergone (6 years and 10 months) and directed to be released forthwith.

The Supreme Court reiterated the settled legal position that merely because witnesses are relatives of the deceased and are therefore interested witnesses is not a sufficient ground to discard their testimony. However, the testimony of such witnesses must be scrutinized with greater caution and circumspection.

The Court observed that the fact that the co-accused allegedly used the blunt side of the axe, while the appellant used a stick, raised a question as to whether there was a prior intention to kill the deceased.

Lack of premeditation was observed considering that the implements used were basic farm tools within easy reach where the offense had occurred.

Consideration was also given to the nature of injuries and absence of evidence that may point towards cruelty or unwarranted advantage on the part of the appellant when deciding not to affirm the murder conviction.

The Court held that the situation indicated a sudden quarrel in the heat of the moment out of prior enmity between the parties, bringing the case within Exception IV of Section 300 IPC. The Supreme Court, therefore, partially granted the appeal, commuting the appellant's conviction from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Part I of Section 304 IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).

Coram: Justice B.R. Gavai & Justice Augustine George Masih
Between: Sudam Prabhakar Achat Vs State of Maharashtra 2025 INSC 378
Date of Judgment: 21-03-2025