Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Parents' Care Leading To Death Not Murder: Calcutta High Court Reduces Life Term To 14 Yrs

The Calcutta High Court has converted the conviction of two brothers from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, holding that a fatal assault arising out of a sudden family quarrel over responsibility for maintaining aged parents lacked premeditation and therefore did not attract Section 302 of the IPC. A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta partly allowed the appeal filed by Aimuddin Sheikh and another against their life sentence imposed by the trial court in Nadia.According to the prosecution, the appellants and the victims were siblings who had recently received equal shares of their father's property. A meeting was convened at the family home to decide who would bear the responsibility of feeding and caring for their parents. The talks turned heated, following which the appellants briefly left the spot and returned within minutes carrying sharp household implements such as a bhojali and hasua. They assaulted two of their brothers, causing the death of one, Ainuddin, while the other, Kalimuddin, survived after treatment. The trial court convicted the appellants under Sections 302, 326 and 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment.Reassessing the evidence, the High Court noted several lapses in the investigation, including delayed recording of statements, non-production of seized weapons before the doctor or court, and hostility of key witnesses. Nevertheless, it held that the occurrence of the assault stood proved on the basis of medical evidence and the testimony of the deceased's wife. The central question, the Court said, was whether the offence amounted to murder or culpable homicide.The Bench found no material to show premeditation or a deliberate intention to kill. The accused had come unarmed to a family settlement meeting and used ordinary household tools picked up in the heat of the moment. The interval between their departure and return was only about three minutes, which the Court held was too short for forming a calculated plan to commit murder. Both brothers were attacked during the same episode, yet only one succumbed, and the post-mortem doctor testified that earlier medical intervention might have saved the deceased. These circumstances, the Court observed, indicated a sudden fight in the heat of passion rather than a cold-blooded act.Placing reliance on principles laid down by the Supreme Court of India on Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC, the Bench held that the case fell within the ambit of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as the incident occurred without premeditation during a sudden quarrel among family members and without the accused taking undue advantage or acting in a cruel manner. Consequently, the conviction was altered to Section 304 Part I IPC.Taking note that the appellants had already undergone about 14 years of incarceration and that the dispute arose within the family, the Court sentenced them to the period already undergone and set aside the fine, directing their release subject to statutory formalities.Case: Aimuddin Sheikh & Anr. Versus The State of West BengalCase No: C.R.A. 480 of 2012Click here to read order

Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Parents' Care Leading To Death Not Murder: Calcutta High Court Reduces Life Term To 14 Yrs

Srinjoy Das

Tags