Prayagraj, Jul 28 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court has dismissed an appeal of an 82-year-old man convicted for the murder of his brother in 1984 and directed him to surrender to serve the remaining part of his life sentence.
A two-judge bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Jai Krishna Upadhyay found that the evidence on record did not disclose any mitigating circumstances warranting conversion of the appellant’s conviction from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
Dismissing the appeal, the court also rejected the appellant’s plea to reduce his sentence to the period already undergone.
The court observed that it could not extend such relief merely because the appellant was now 82 years old and had remained on bail during the pendency of the appeal for nearly four decades.
In its judgment passed on July 17, the court observed “The evidence adduced did not reflect a sudden and grave provocation or sudden fight account of which the court may examine the possibility of setting aside the conviction under Section 302 IPC and hold the appellant guilty under Section 304 Part (II) IPC.” The court said that though it was disturbed that the appellant would have to go back to jail after 40 years, the court could not do much as it did not possess the powers of the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
The appellant, Babu Lal, was convicted by the trial court in October 1984 for causing the death of his brother by repeatedly assaulting him with a ‘sabri’, an object used for agricultural digging.
The counsel for the appellant had argued that the appellant had been accused of using an object which is not used as a dedicated weapon and was further used from the blunt side, which reflected that he had no intention to kill the deceased.
It was also contended that even if the prosecution case is taken in its entirety to be true and proved beyond reasonable doubt, the only offence for which the appellant could have been held guilty of and punished was for an offence under Section 325 IPC (causing grievous hurt).
The court observed, “The intention to commit murder cannot be dismissed only on account of nature of weapon used, more particularly the intention is to be adduced by that part of human anatomy which was targeted by the assailant coupled with the knowledge also a part of mens rea that the use of the article to target a vital part of the human body would cause grievous hurt, which in the ordinary course of nature may result in death or will result in death.” PTI COR RAJ KSS KSS
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.