'Harsh To Send Him To Jail At This Age' : Supreme Court Reduces Sentence Of 80-Year-Old Convicted For Homicide

The Supreme Court has reduced the sentence of a man convicted for causing the death of another person during a village clash in 1992 to the period already undergone, citing his advanced age of over 80 years.A Bench of Justices N. V. Anjaria and K. Vinod Chandran upheld the conviction of Shrikrishna under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code, but modified the sentence imposed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.BackgroundThe incident occurred on December 10, 1992, at Village Dudankhedi in Madhya Pradesh, following a quarrel between the sons of the accused and the deceased Ram Singh. When Ram Singh went to question the accused about the assault on his son, a group clash broke out between the two sides. During the altercation, Ram Singh sustained head injuries after being struck with a lathi and died the next day while undergoing treatment.The trial court had convicted Shrikrishna and others for murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Madhya Pradesh High Court later altered the conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC, holding that the incident was a free fight without a common object, and sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment.The Supreme Court upheld the conviction the octogenarian accused, holding that as the incident arose out of a sudden fight without premeditation or intent to kill, his act amounted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder and was punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC. A bench of Justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court's decision, which modified the conviction for murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. “For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned judgment and order of the High Court convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 304 Part II, IPC is justified and warrants no interference. It is sustained.”, the court observed. In 1997, the trial court convicted him under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. However, the Madhya Pradesh High Court later held that it was a free fight without premeditation or common object, altered the conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC, and reduced the sentence to seven years' rigorous imprisonment with fine.Challenging the conviction, the convict moved to the Supreme Court. Upholding the impugned decision, the judgment authored by Justice Anjaria found no reason to interfere with the High Court's decision, noting that the High Court has correctly altered the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Since, the incident happened out of an altercation in a mutual fight, the Appellant cannot be said to have acting having an intention to kill the deceased, though having a knowledge that the injury might cause death making him liable to be punished under Section 304 Part II IPC. “The way as the sequence of events happened in the instant case and since the offence by the appellant was committed in the midst of commotion and group clash, it could be legitimately inferred that the appellant acted without any premeditation as such to cause the death of Ram Singh, although in eye of law, having regard to the kind of weapon used and the nature of injury inflicted, which corresponded to the weapon used, knowledge could be inferred in law. Even according to the prosecution, the incident occurred when the deceased came to the house of the appellant, to question him, when some others also gathered and there was a free fight. In fact, the appellant suffered serious injuries to his head in the same transaction.”, the court said. Since the appellant was an aged man, the court, displaying sensitivity, reduced the sentence to the sentence already undergone. “The appellant is more than 80 years of age at present. Since the appellant is an old and aged person, and in the December of his life, it would be harsh and inadvisable to send him behind the bars again at this stage. The courts are not supposed to be insensitive. Therefore, in view of the advanced age of the appellant and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, while upholding the conviction of the appellant under Section 304, Part II, IPC, the sentence of the appellant is reduced to what is already undergone, to be substituted accordingly.”, the court said. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, with the aforesaid modification in the sentence. Cause Title: SHRIKRISHNA VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHCitation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 35Click here to download judgmentAppearance: For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aftab Ali Khan, AOR Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Amicus Curiae Mr. Pranav Giri, Adv. Mr. Jay Nirupam, Adv. Mr. D. Girish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Ritik Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.P. Singh, D.A.G. Mr. Aditya Vaibhav Singh Ga, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AORRelated: S.304 IPC | How 'Intention' & 'Knowledge' Determine If Offence Is Culpable Homicide Not Amounting To...

'Harsh To Send Him To Jail At This Age' : Supreme Court Reduces Sentence Of 80-Year-Old Convicted For Homicide

Yash Mittal

Tags