Suraj Bhan v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
In this criminal appeal, the High Court of Delhi held that while the appellant intended to kill his sister, the sudden nature of the act in the heat of passion brought it within Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC. The conviction for murder was converted to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part I IPC.
What did the court decide?
Conviction under Section 302 IPC converted to Section 304 Part I IPC; sentences reduced to period already undergone; bail bonds discharged.
What the court decided
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A.1/2003
SURAJ BHAN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. S.P. Kaushal with Mr. Ravinder Mehandra, Dhananjay Kaushal, Advocates. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VINOD GOEL JUDGMENT 09.08.2018
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. :
- This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7th August, 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi („ASJ‟) in Sessions Case No.49/99 arising out of FIR No.101/99 registered at Police Station („PS‟) Paschim Vihar convicting the Appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code („IPC‟) and Section 27 of the Arms Act and the order on sentence dated 12th August, 2002 whereby for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment („RI‟) for one year; for the offence under Section 307 IPC to undergo RI for seven years along with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default of payment to further undergo RI for one year; and for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, to RI for three years along with a fine of Rs.500/-, and in default of payment of
Crl.A.1/2003 Page 1 of 7
fine to further undergo RI for six months.
- The charge framed against the Appellant by the order dated 5th August, 1999 of the trial Court was that on 3rd February, 1999 at about 3.15 pm at House No.RZ-134, Sayed Nangloi, Delhi, he intentionally committed the murder of his sister Smt. Roshni („the deceased‟) thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Secondly, he was charged with firing at Rajbir Singh (PW-13) and Smt. Santosh (PW-6) with a countrymade katta (firearm) on the same date, time and place, thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and further that by using the country-made firearm, as described above, he had committed an offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC should be convicted to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC.
Whether Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC applies due to the heat of passion and sudden outburst without premeditation.
Whether the appellant is entitled to discharge of bail bonds after completing the period of sentence.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Suraj Bhan
- respondent
State
Coram
S. Muralidhar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court