counsel for the
appellant submitted that, the incident happened in a sudden
provocation and no offence under Section 307 IPC is made out.
I cannot ... accused is not
occurred due to any sudden provocation. The sudden
provocation is ruled out with the evidence of PW4, PW5 and
PW7. The accused
only overtact alleged against the petitioner is
that, in a sudden provocation, the petitioner pushed his
son and he fell down. The learned counsel also ... body and death is due to complications of
Cerebral compression (Epilepitic seizure -
sudden unexpected death in Epilepitic)
precipitated by the emotional stress and
excitement
according to him it is out of the
grave and sudden provocation of the act of the
deceased by throwing the thali chain
attracted considering the pendency of
the counter case, because there was sudden
provocation and it resulted in assault by the
applicants and therefore, only offence ... investigating officer
did not go into those aspects and details of
sudden provocations by the de facto complainant
and others and it resulted
adduced to show that the accused
due to grave and sudden provocation was
deprived of self control and he, therefore,
attacked the victim and killed
deprived of the powers of self control by
grave and sudden provocation and the incident happened without
premeditation in the heat of passion. He would
will not be attracted because
it was on sudden provocation that the applicants
had allegedly attacked the defacto complainant and
therefore, at the most only
counsel submitted
that, his wife committed suicide because of some
sudden provocation for which the petitioner is not
responsible. The counsel submitted that, the
petitioner
Whether the
petitioners had intention or whether it was justified by
sudden provocation, as alleged by the learned Counsel
appearing for them, is a matter
wife, while was lying on the bed and
that was the sudden provocation, which led the applicant to
cause the death of his brother
