SHAM SUNDER versus PURAN AND ANR.

SHAM SUNDER versus PURAN AND ANR.

Conviction under section 304 Part-I IPC is maintained, as evidence supports intentional infliction of injuries sufficient to cause death but respondents exceeded right of private defence; sentence imposed by High Court is inadequate and enhanced to rigorous imprisonment for five years.

Parties
Appellant: Sham Sunder; Respondent: Puran; Respondent: Tara Chand
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 September 1990
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Disposing Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed; conviction under section 304 Part-I IPC maintained, sentence enhanced.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Murder, Culpable Homicide, Indian Penal Code
Criminal Law Sentencing Murder Culpable Homicide Indian Penal Code

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Sham Sunder

Appellant

Puran

Respondent

Tara Chand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Disposing Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of conviction under section 304 Part-I IPC after reduction from section 302 IPC
  2. 2 Adequacy of sentence imposed by High Court

Ratio Decidendi

Conviction under section 304 Part-I IPC is maintained, as evidence supports intentional infliction of injuries sufficient to cause death but respondents exceeded right of private defence; sentence imposed by High Court is inadequate and enhanced to rigorous imprisonment for five years.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed; conviction under section 304 Part-I IPC maintained, sentence enhanced.

Orders

  • Respondents to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years.
  • Fine, if paid, to be refunded to respondents 1 and 2.