Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2018 DIGILAW 65 (SC)

Laljibhai Maganbhai Vasava v. State Of Gujarat

2018-01-15

A.K.SIKRI, ASHOK BHUSHAN

body2018
ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Arguments heard. 3. Limited notice was issued in this matter on the question as to whether the appellant has rightly been convicted by the trial Court (as affirmed by the High Court) under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or the case would fall within the four corners of Section 304 Part II IPC. 4. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court wherein the nature of injuries inflicted by the appellant on the deceased (his wife) are mentioned. A perusal of those injuries would reflect that the appellant had not caused any injury on the vital parts of the body. It is also pertinent to note that the High Court has itself concluded that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to cause death of his wife. It is also a categorical finding recorded by the High Court that he did not intend to cause such bodily injury as he knew that was likely to cause death within the meaning of clause"Secondly" of Section 300 IPC. However, after applying the ingredients of clause"Thirdly" of Section 300 IPC, the appellant is convicted under the provision with the observation that the appellant intended to cause bodily injuries sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death of his wife. 5. On going through the nature of injuries, we are not in agreement with the aforesaid conclusion of the High Court. A fight took place between the appellant and his wife which led to the causing of the injuries. It is stated at the cost of repetition that the injuries are not on vital parts. Having regard to the above, we are of the opinion that the appellant should have been convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC instead of Section 302. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 302 IPC is set aside and the appellant is convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC for which we impose sentence of 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment. 6. We are informed that the appellant has already undergone 10 years of sentence. If that be so, the appellant shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 7. The appeal stands allowed.