Acted In Spur Of The Moment: Telangana High Court Reduces Sentence To Just ₹500 Fine For Wife Accused Of Stabbing Husband To Death
The Court held that the accused-wife had stabbed the deceased knowing that the act was likely to cause injury, but observed that the incident occurred in the heat of the moment during a sudden quarrel and without intention to cause death.
The Telangana High Court upheld the conviction of a woman under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code for stabbing her husband to death during a sudden quarrel, while modifying the sentence of four years’ rigorous imprisonment into a fine of ₹500.
The Court observed that though the accused knew that stabbing with a knife could cause injury likely to result in death, the act had been committed “in the spur of the moment” during a sudden altercation and without intention to cause death.
The Court was hearing a criminal appeal filed by the wife challenging the judgment of the Sessions Court convicting her under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentencing her to four years’ rigorous imprisonment for causing the death of her husband.
A Bench of Justice Tirumala Devi Eada observed: “To hold the conviction under Section 304-II of IPC, knowledge that the said act is likely to cause the death of the deceased is sufficient. In the present case it is proved that the accused No.1 stabbed the deceased with a knife, knowing fully well that the said act could result in an injury to the deceased, but at the said point of time when she acted, she must not have realized that it would go to the extent of causing the death of the deceased, as she acted in a spur of the moment. Thus, the offence under Section 304-II of the IPC is proved beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution.
However, the Bench added: “In these facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration the circumstances in which the act has been committed by the accused No. 1, this Court takes a lenient view and converts the sentence to that of only a fine”.
Advocate G. Gnana Raghav appeared as Amicus Curiae for the appellant. D. Arun Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor, appeared for the State.
Background
According to the prosecution, the accused wife stabbed her husband with a knife, resulting in his death. A charge sheet was initially filed for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.
During the trial, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses and marked documentary as well as material evidence, including the knife allegedly used in the offence.
The Sessions Court ultimately held that the case did not amount to murder punishable under Section 302 IPC, but instead convicted the accused under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced her to four years’ rigorous imprisonment along with a fine.
Before the High Court, the Amicus Curiae appearing for the accused contended that the incident had occurred in the heat of the moment when the deceased allegedly came to the house of the accused in a naked condition, abused her family members in filthy language and behaved aggressively. It was argued that the accused had no intention or knowledge that her act would result in death.
Court’s Observation
The High Court examined the evidence of prosecution witnesses, including the testimony of the neighbour who first heard the quarrel and later found the deceased lying injured with a stab wound to the neck.
The Court noted that the mother of the deceased had admitted during cross-examination that criminal cases, including a rape case and a theft case, were pending against the deceased earlier. However, the Bench clarified that such antecedents were not being considered for determining guilt in the present case.
The Bench further noted that the accused and the deceased had been living separately for some time before the incident and that on the date of occurrence, the deceased had gone to the parental house of the accused.
According to the evidence on record, the deceased initially quarrelled with the accused and her family members and later returned in a naked condition while continuing to abuse them. The Court found that the knife used in the offence had been recovered pursuant to the confession made by the accused and that the recovery stood proved through the evidence of panch witnesses.
The Bench also relied upon the postmortem report establishing that the deceased died due to stab injuries penetrating internal organs. The Court observed that the case squarely fell within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC dealing with culpable homicide committed without premeditation during a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel.
Referring to the surrounding circumstances, the Bench held that the accused had acted during a sudden quarrel and not with the intention of causing death. The Court nevertheless held that knowledge attributable under Section 304 Part II IPC stood established since stabbing a person with a knife was an act likely to cause death.
While affirming the conviction, the Court took note of the circumstances in which the offence had occurred and observed: “with regard to the sentence, the trial court has sentenced the accused No.1 to four years of imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, and also a default sentence is imposed, … It is borne out from the record that the accused No.1 has already paid the fine. Under 304-II of IPC, the sentence can be of imprisonment or fine or both”.
Conclusion
The High Court partly allowed the criminal appeal.
The Court upheld the conviction of the accused-wife under Section 304 Part II IPC but modified the sentence imposed by the trial court.
“The sentence of rigorous imprisonment for four years is set aside and modified to a fine of Rs. 500/- only, in default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month”, the Court concluded.
Cause Title: Reshma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh