SHARMA, J. - (1.) SHIV Raj (appellant herein) while selling vegetables on his Thela, was slapped by a college student viz. Ashok (since deceased ). SHIV Raj chased Ashok and inflicted a blow with knife that laid on his chest as a result of which Ashok died. SHIV Raj, along with three co-accused persons, was put to trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Kota, who vide judgment dated November 23, 2001 while acquitting co accused persons, convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:- Under Section 302 IPC: To suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months. Under Section 324 IPC: To suffer simple imprisonment for two years. Under Section 4/25 Arms Act: To suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. Substantive Sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) IT is the prosecution case that on April 10, 2001 at 10 PM Raghunath Suman, (Pw. 8) ASI Police Station Kunhari, reached MBS Hospital Kota and recorded parcha bayan (Ex. P-1) of Roop Narayan (Pw. 1 ). IT was inter alia stated in Parcha Bayan that the informant and Ashok were studying in Government College and resided in Kunhari. On April 9, 2001 around 7-8 PM they had gone to purchase vegetables at Chungi-naka crossing where they had a quarrel with Shiv Raj and the incident was reported to police. On April 10, 2001 around 5. 30 PM while informant and Ashok were passing near vegetable Thela of Shiv Raj he and his three companions chased them and Shiv Raj inflicted knife-blow on the chest of Ashok as a result of which he fell down. When the informant tried to intervene the assailants also attacked on him with knives and gave blows with legs and fists. Meanwhile Gajanand, Jitendra and Rajesh etc. arrived there and assailants fled away. The informant and Ashok were removed to hospital where Ashok succumbed to his injuries. On that Parcha Bayan a case under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149 IPC was registered and investigation commenced. Postmortem on the dead body was performed. Necessary memos were drawn, statement of witnesses were recorded, the accused was arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2 Kota. Charges under Sections 147 or 148 302 or 302/149, 307 or 307/149 IPC and 4/25 Arms Act were framed. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 21 witnesses. In the explanation under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , the appellant claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions disposed of the case as indicated herein above. Indisputably death of Ashok was homicidal in nature. As per Postmortem Report (Ex. P-21) one Stab wound was found over anterior aspect of chest on left side of deceased which was measuring 1. 5 x 0. 3 cm x deep? 5cm in the mid line, 5cm below. In the opinion of Dr. P. K. Tiwari (Pw. 19) the cause of death was shock as a result of injury to till lung. As per injury report (Ex. P-12) Roop Narayan received following injuries:- 1. Stab wound 3 x 1/2 cm x muscle deep on Lt. thigh 2. Incised wound 1 x 1/4cm x skin deep on back of Rt. wrist. 3. Scratch 3cm long on Rt. forearm 4. C/o pain chest and abdomen. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that there was no previous ill-will between the parties and the appellant was not the one who had started the quarrel. Appellant acted in a heat of passion during a sudden quarrel without any premeditation and inflicted a solitary knife-blow therefore appellant could not be held guilty under Section 302 IPC. Reliance is placed on Hari Ram vs. State of Haryana (1983)1 SCC 193 and Krishna Tiwari vs. State of Bihar JT 2001 (3) SC 331. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor supported the judgment of learned trial Court and urged that since the appellant acted in a cruel and unusual manner he was not entitled to the benefit of exception to Section 300 IPC.
(3.) WE have pondered over the submissions. In Hari Ram vs. State of Haryana (supra) and Krishna Tiwari vs. State of Bihar (supra), the case cited by the learned counsel for the appellant the accused who after getting provoked came with sharp edged weapon and got the same thrusted on the chest of the deceased, were found guilty under Section 304 IPC. To invoke Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC four requirements must be satisfied:- (i) it was a sudden fight; (ii) there was no premeditation; (iii) the act was done in the heat of passion; and (iv) the assailant had not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner. In the instant case all these ingredients are found present. The deceased and his companion met the appellant at his vegetable Thela where deceased slapped the appellant, the appellant in a fit of anger chased the deceased and inflicted solitary blow with knife on the person of deceased. His act appears to us sudden and unpremeditated. It appears that appellant lost his temper and committed crime. There was no previous enmity and the appellant did not take undue advantage of the situation. Taking an overall view of the incident, we are inclined to think that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of exception relied upon. ;