Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. The learned counsel for the appellant emphatically pleads that Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC is available to the accused/appellant. The learned counsel contends that though indisputably the burden is on the accused to show that his case would come under Exception 4, the accused has no obligation to adduce any evidence on his side to bring his case within the sweep of Exception 4. The accused is undoubtedly entitled, we agree, on the available materials adduced by the prosecution, to show that his case falls within the sweep of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.

12. Before proceeding to consider the play of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, we must note that on facts it is easy to come to the conclusion that the offence alleged against the appellant/accused falls first within Section 299 IPC and later under the third clause of Section 300. It becomes an offence of murder under Section 300 IPC. On this aspect also, we are of the opinion that it is not necessary to delve deeper into facts. That the deceased died of the three injuries described in Exhibit P5 postmortem certificate is not disputed. That these injuries were inflicted by the accused by stabbing thrice with MO1 is also clearly established. Those injuries are sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death is also established beyond the pale of controversy. The accused planted these stabs on the vital parts - neck and chest, of the deceased and his intention to cause the injuries which resulted is a matter of prudent inference. In these circumstances, but for the play of one of the Exceptions under Section 300 IPC the act proved would fall squarely within the offence of murder defined under Section 300 IPC punishable under Section 302 IPC.

Explanation.- It is immaterial in such cases which party offers the provocation or commits the first assault."

15. We note first of all that Exception 4 is one affording mitigation and not absolution from liability. Culpable homicide falling under Section 299 IPC gets aggravated and falls within the sweep of Section 300 IPC if the mental element falls within one of the four clauses of Section 300 IPC. The law then takes note of certain circumstances and mandates that if one of the five exceptions are applicable, the offence of murder under Section 300 IPC would slide back again to the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 299 IPC.

(emphasis supplied) There must be allegations of unusual cruelty or unusual manner of infliction to attract the application of Exception 4. Merely because the acts resulted in fatal injuries and led to the death of the accused, it cannot possibly be contended that Exception 4 will not be applicable. Such a contention would militate against the very relevance of Exception 4 as an exception to Section 300 IPC.

31. Three injuries have been inflicted. Will the infliction of the three injuries suggest taking of undue advantage and acting in a cruel or unusual manner or acting after the heat of passion had subsided? This is the last question raised. Repetition of the infliction need not necessarily be indicative in all cases of deliberation and non-existence of the heat of passion. In fact, it could be otherwise. The mere fact that three injuries were inflicted in quick succession evidently while the combat was going on may indicate conduct in frenzy in the heat of passion and cannot in these circumstances be held to be indicative of sufficient reason to deny the advantage of Exception 4 to the accused.