Anil Kumar v State of Kerala.
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 2697 of 2023.
Date: November 01, 2023.
Court: Supreme Court of India.
Quorum: Hon’ble J. Abhay S. Oka, J. Pankaj Mithal.
Facts of the case
The appeal was filed when the appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000 and to undergo simple imprisonment for one year under Section 302 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 498A IPC. The appellant allegedly threw a lit matchstick on his wife after she poured kerosene over herself due to the quarrel.
Initially, the case was registered under Section 307 of IPC as it was stated that the wife was tired of the torture and wanted to end everything. The appellant took advantage of the situation. The charge changed to 302 and 498 after she died in the hospital, and her husband was charged with uxoricide. The children of the couple testified that the appellant had the habit of hitting their wife.
Legal Issue
Whether there was a premeditated mind to kill or was it merely grave and sudden provocation resulting in the action?
Legal provisions
Indian Penal Code:
- 300 – Murder and when culpable homicide is not murder.
- 302 – Punishment for murder.
- 304 – Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
- 307 – Attempt to murder.
- 498A – Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.
Contentions of appellant
The learned counsel for the appellant defended that he was not guilty of burning his wife. She had suicidal tendencies and had made several attempts to do it. He did the act due to the grave and sudden provocation caused by the quarrel. Later, he tried to prevent her from doing it the day by pouring a bucket of water, and therefore, he did not possess any premeditated mind to kill. Thus, these Sections are not applicable; at best, he can be charged under Section 304 part II of IPC. They argued that it was due to grave and sudden provocation and that there was no premeditated intention to kill.
Contentions of the respondent
The learned counsel of the respondent opposed this and argued that the appellant had burnt his wife with a matchstick, fully knowing she was drenched in kerosene oil and it would cause death. Additionally, the evidence of the witnesses clearly proves that the couple had petty arguments often and the husband tortured her, including the statement of the wife before passing away in the hospital. She had stated that he would assault her after getting drunk and threw light on the pending criminal cases against the appellant.
Judgement and analysis
The Supreme Court of India held that the evidence and dying declaration of the wife clearly points to the fact that the appellant had a clear intention to kill her and had taken advantage of the situation in which his wife was drenched in kerosene. The testimony of the neighbour helped in establishing that there was a substantial amount of time between the quarrel and setting on fire. Therefore, the appellant is guilty of the offense of culpable homicide amounting to murdered and is not entitled to exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
Thus, the Court upheld the decisions of lower courts and was of the opinion that the courts did not commit any error of fact or law in convicting and sentencing the appellant to a maximum punishment of life imprisonment. They dismissed the appeal due to lack of merits.
Judgment reviewed by Maria Therese Syriac.
Click here to read the Judgement.
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.
