Exception 4 To S. 300 IPC Won't Apply When Murder Happened In One-Sided Attack With No Mutual Exchange Of Blows : Supreme Cour

The Supreme Court observed that when an accused resorts to physical violence without any quarrel or reciprocal aggression from the deceased, the exception of culpable homicide not amounting to murder cannot be invoked to seek a reduced sentence.

In the present case, the appellant had delivered a knife blow to an unarmed victim and sought the benefit of lesser punishment under Exceptions 2 and 4 to Section 300 IPC. While Exception 2 applies where the accused acts in self-defense, Exception 4 covers situations involving premeditation, a sudden fight, an act committed in the heat of passion, or conduct that is neither cruel nor unusual.

The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that Exception 2 cannot be invoked as there was no act of self-defence by the Appellant against an unarmed deceased, and for Exception 4 to apply, there must be a genuine physical confrontation with a mutual exchange of blows between the parties, and not merely a verbal quarrel.

“In our view, the act in question would not fall under Exception 2 because, firstly, there is no evidence to show that the accused or his property was attacked by the deceased. Even in his statement under Section 313 CrPC no plea of self-defense or of deceased causing any injury to the appellant was raised. Besides, no defense evidence was led. Further, it is not shown that the deceased was armed. In such circumstances, in our view, benefit of Exception 2 would not be available to the petitioner…

As far as Exception 4 is concerned, an act of culpable homicide does not amount to murder if following ingredients are fulfilled (i) there is no pre-meditation; (ii) there is a sudden fight; (iii) the act is committed in the heat of passion; and (iv) the assailant has not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner. Although the term 'fight' has not been defined in IPC, but the consistent view is that it implies mutual assault by use of criminal force and not mere verbal duel.”, the court said.

“where the accused is armed and the deceased is unarmed, Exception 2 can have no application and Exception 4 to Section 300 would not apply if there is sudden quarrel but no fight between the deceased and the accused. It was held that 'fight' postulates a bilateral transaction in which blows are exchanged.”, the court held.

“In the instant case, there is no evidence of exchange of blows. In our view, therefore, case would not fall under Exception 4 to Section 300. Moreover, infliction of 4 knife blows to an unarmed person, on vital parts of the body, is indicative of the accused acting in a cruel manner.”, the court observed, adding that “we do not find any mitigating circumstances on basis whereof we may reduce the sentence by altering the conviction of the appellant for an offence lesser than one punishable under Section 302 IPC.”

The appeal was dismissed.

Cause Title: SURENDER KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1202

Click here to download order

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR Mr. Swaroopanand Mishra, Adv. Mr. Mrigank Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Dhriti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rahulkumar, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Sethi, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR