MURLIDHAR SHIVRAM PATEKAR & ANR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

MURLIDHAR SHIVRAM PATEKAR & ANR. versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Court found that there was no premeditation on the part of the accused and the scuffle that led to the deceased's death took place due to sudden provocation by the deceased. Consequently, the accused were entitled to the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. The appropriate conviction is under Section 304...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Murlidhar Shivram Patekar; Respondent: State of Maharashtra
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal disposed of; conviction modified to Section 304 Part II IPC, sentence fixed at 10 years' imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Murder, Culpable Homicide, Indian Penal Code, Section 302, Section 304 Part II, Exception 4 to Section 300
Criminal Law Murder Culpable Homicide Indian Penal Code Section 302 Section 304 Part II Exception 4 to Section 300

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Murlidhar Shivram Patekar

Appellant

State of Maharashtra

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the death of Asaram was homicidal in light of the evidence produced by prosecution witnesses?
  2. 2 Whether the appellants in furtherance of their common intention, to take revenge of the alleged rape on accused No. 2, murdered Asaram and whether the accused are entitled to the benefit under Exception 4 of Section 300, IPC?
  3. 3 What order?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that there was no premeditation on the part of the accused and the scuffle that led to the deceased's death took place due to sudden provocation by the deceased. Consequently, the accused were entitled to the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. The appropriate conviction is under Section 304 Part II IPC rather than Section 302, with a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment deemed sufficient.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of; conviction modified to Section 304 Part II IPC, sentence fixed at 10 years' imprisonment.

Orders

  • Conviction of the appellants is altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part II IPC.
  • Sentence of imprisonment for 10 years imposed in lieu of life imprisonment.