Read Time: 07 minutes

The Supreme Court has converted conviction of a man from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder for his act of pouring kerosene oil in an inebriated state on his nine-month pregnant wife, who got burnt on bursting of stove, resulting into her subsequent death due to the burn injuries in year 2007.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B Varale ordered release of Dattatraya after converting his conviction from Section 302 to 304 Part II of the IPC and reducing his sentence from life term to 10 years rigorous imprisonment.

"The act of the appellant is not premeditated, but is a result of sudden fight and quarrel in the heat of passion. Therefore, we convert the findings of Section 302 to that of 304 Part-II, as we are of the opinion that though the appellant had knowledge that such an act can result in the death of the deceased, but there was no intention to kill the deceased. Therefore, this is an offence which would come under Part-II not under Part-I of Section 304 of the IPC," the bench said.

The court accepted a submission by the counsel of the petitioner that though the accused had knowledge of the consequences of the act he was committing, yet there was no intention to cause death. 

In the case, the bench said even if we do not consider the dying declaration of the deceased, there is sufficient evidence to prove that it was the appellant who had poured kerosene on the deceased which led to the burn injuries and the death of the deceased and the child she was bearing. There is no doubt that an offence under Section 316 has clearly been made out, the court said.

"We have, by and large, accepted the case of the prosecution as to the incident itself. There is sufficient evidence to prove that the burn injury was caused to the deceased by an act done at the hands of the appellant and it was the appellant who had come to his house under the influence of liquor and poured kerosene on his wife while she was cooking food for him on a stove, which resulted in bursting of the stove and causing burn injuries on the deceased. There is also sufficient proof of the fact that the husband and wife were having frequent fights even earlier," the bench said.

From the available evidence, the bench said, it is a case where a sudden fight took place between the husband and wife. The deceased at that time was carrying a pregnancy of nine months and it was the act of pouring kerosene on the deceased that resulted in the fire and the subsequent burn injuries and the ultimate death of the deceased. 

"In our considered opinion, this act at the hands of the appellant will be covered under the fourth exception given under Section 300 of the IPC, i.e., “Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender's having taken undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner”," the bench said.

The court partly allowed the appeal and set aside the 2010 Bombay High Court's judgement which had dismissed the appellant's plea against the Usmanabad trial court's decision.