Reasonable doubt prevails SC extendeds benefit of doubt in culpable homicide case
Title: SEKARAN V STATE OF TN
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2294 OF 2010
Dated on: 12.12.2023
Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI, JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR & JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
Facts of the case
In the present case the appellant was found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder for fatally striking Palas, a coconut cutter, with a rubber stick following a wage dispute. The appellant disputed the conviction on the grounds that the FIR was filed late, material witnesses were withheld, there was no purpose to kill, and the death could have been caused by an accidental fall from a tree. The respondent defended the conviction based on eyewitness testimony, the post-mortem report, and the High Court’s appellate power to evaluate evidence. In spite of the post-partum report substantiating the fact that the victim was killed due to a hard object(stick) hitting his head and evidences of eyewitnesses. Further the respondents argued that there was no intention on behalf of the apelet to kill the victim i.e. to cause Palas death.
Issues
whether, based on the evidence on record, the High Court was justified in returning a finding that the appellant was guilty of the offence punishable under section 304-Part II, IPC and liable to be sentenced as a consequence thereof, as has been imposed on him?
Legal provision
In the present case the accused was charged with sec 304 part 2 of the IPC which states that if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death (but without any intention to cause death), the punishment can be imprisonment up to ten years or fine, or both. Here the appellant has injured Palas with a blow to his head during the heat of the moment which has ultimately led to the death of the Palas.
Court analysis and judgement
The Supreme Court upheld the appeal and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of the doubt. The Court found several flaws and inconsistencies in the prosecution case, including a lack of explanation for the delay in filing the FIR, the failure to cross-examine independent witnesses, a contradiction between the medical documents and the oral evidence, and the presence of ethyl alcohol in the deceased’s body. The Court also stated that the prosecution failed to establish the appellant’s intent or motive to kill Palas.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh