Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Meghalaya High Court has modified the conviction of a man found guilty of murder of his wife’s ex husband under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the Sessions Court. Drawing an analogy from the Ramayana, the Court stated “In a sacred relationship, the husband is the property of the wife and vice versa and if one betrays the other, this type of incident will take place due to sudden provocation / emotion.”

The court, presided over by a Division Bench, comprising the Chief Justice S. Vaidyanathan and Justice W. Diengdoh, concluded that the case falls under Exception 2 to Section 300 IPC and warranted a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC.

The prosecution case was that the deceased, Oli Siangshai, was killed by the accused, Phot Khaii, by a weapon used in a paddy field. The primary argument from Khaii's counsel was the lack of direct eyewitnesses, except for the wife of the accused (P.W.3), and that Khaii's involvement was based solely on his confession. The accused’s confession stated that on May 14, 2002, he returned home to find Siangshai with his wife in a compromising position in his bedroom, which provoked him to kill Siangshai with a dao (traditional knife).

The court noted inconsistencies in the statements made by the wife of the accused, casting doubt on her character and reliability. Initially, she claimed that Siangshai pointed a pistol at Khaii, contradicting her later testimony that implicated Khaii directly. Despite these inconsistencies, the court acknowledged the illicit relationship between her and her ex-husband, which likely provoked Khaii.

The court underscored “Merely because the deceased is the ex-husband of the wife of the accused, it does not give her license to maintain her relationship more so illicitly even after her separation from him and in that event, the establishment of reverential trust between the husband and wife by way of marriage would be meaningless.”

“Human life may be compared to a bicycle, which has two wheels and the front wheel is a husband and the back wheel is a wife. If there is any problem with one of the wheels, the cycle (in a sense family) cannot run smoothly. In this case, because of the extra marital affairs of the wife, which has been accepted by her in her evidence, the entire family, much less children got affected,” the court further observed.

The court concluded that while the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Khaii committed the act, it fell under Exception 2 of Section 300 IPC. This exception applies when an act of self-defence, in good faith, exceeds the legal limits without premeditation or intent to cause more harm than necessary.

The court noted “there is every possibility for a prudent man to lose his temper / self-control, when he sees his wife with some other person in a naked and compromising position, which, though morally justified, but looking at the legal perspective, is not sustained.”

Thus, the court modified Khaii’s conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 IPC. The sentence was reduced to three years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 50,000, in default of which he would serve an additional five months. The period already spent in custody would be set off against the sentence.

 

Cause Title: Phot Khaii v State of Meghalaya [Crl.A.No.3/2024]