Posted On by &filed under Criminal Law News.


Man gets 10 years jail term for killing suspected thief

Man gets 10 years jail term for killing suspected thief

A man has been awarded a 10-year jail term for beating a suspected thief to death by a Delhi court which observed that he had no business to become a supreme authority and take law into his hands to commit a “fiendish act having shades of stone age”.

The court, however, reduced the charge of murder under section 302 to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under section 304 (Part II) of IPC saying there does not seem to be any real premeditation and accused Kanshu Yadav, a tempo driver, had no intention to murder the victim but merely wanted to teach him a lesson.

“I cannot be oblivious of the fact that the convict had bludgeoned the victim and had given him a very bad hammering and thrashing with a broken fan belt. Even if the convict felt that victim was a thief, he had no business to become a supreme authority and to take law into his own hands and to hand out instant punishment to him.

“Such fiendish act, having shades of stone age, cannot be tolerated in the modern era having a fully developed justice delivery mechanism,” Additional Sessions Judge Manoj Jain said.

The court, which awarded the maximum punishment for the offence, also imposed a fine of Rs 15,000 on Yadav.

The judge noted that there is no actual material on record to suggest that victim was a thief and said from facts of the case it appeared Yadav got enraged because of the theft of his articles from his tempo but had no intention to kill him.

“He (accused), under the fit of rage, gave a hammering to the victim. There does not seem to be any real premeditation.

Action of accused is deplorable and condemnable though I strongly sense that a fleeting impulse overpowered his logical thinking… and in the heat of passion, he tied the victim and gave him whipping.

“Accused had no intention to murder the victim at all and he merely wanted to teach him a lesson. However, to his misfortune, the injuries proved to be grave and he succumbed to the same eventually. Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to hold that this makes it to be case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder,” the judge said.

If an act is done with knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, it is an offence under Section 304(II) of the IPC.

According to the prosecution, on the intervening night of March 25-26, 2012 near Azadpur Mandi here, Yadav had beaten the victim up with a belt after tying him to his tempo, suspecting him to be stealing parts from his vehicle.

 

( Source – PTI )


One Response to “Man gets 10 years jail term for killing suspected thief”

  1. Annd P Gupta

    The Hon’ble Court has recorded the following findings,
    1. I storngly sense that a fleeting impulse overpowered his logical thinking…. in the heat of passion he tied the victim he whipped the victim and gave him a whipping
    2. in a FIT OF RAGE he gave a whipping to the victim ….” IN A FIT OF RAGE”, …; I STRONGLY sense that a fleeting impulse OVERPOWERED HIS LOGICAL THINKING …. IN THE HEAT OF THE PASSION ”
    Let’s analyse:

    Firstly There was no mens ria hence it is not murder
    Seconfly his property was stolen and in the protection/ recovery of his property he got f went into a fit of rage and his logical thinking was totally blacked out. Thus under this , for him a , grave provocation he received from the act of theft, he lost his reasoning because of the over powering rage. HE HAD THEN NO CONTROL OVER HIMSELF AND was not in a position to know if he was doing any illegal act.
    He Whipped the victim.= How many whips he lashed out?, Did the victim die of a shock or even during the first few whips

    Was any Post mortem done to establish any co relationship between the lashing and the cause of death
    Was the victim was already suffering from a disease,infirnity or other illness to which he succumbed ast whipping started.

    The test of ‘grave and sudden ‘ is whether a reasonable man, belonging to the same class of society as the accused, placed in the same milieu and situation in which the accused was placed would be so provoked as to lose his self control. In India even words and gestures also in some circumstances cause grave and sudden provocation ad are accepted by the Courts as such

    If the accused had any knowledge that it is likely to cause death, or he wanted to cause such bodily injury as was likely i to cause death ( BOTH THESE POSSIBILITIES HAVE BEEN FIRMLY RULED OUT BY THE HON’BLE COURT) then the maximum sentence permissible was possibly justifiable as per Sec304 ( second Para) In the instant case the quantum of punishment could have been tinged with some reformative mercy and could have been a tad in fact a few years lees. than the one now given.

    It is quite likely that the Tempo drivesr (who to ply their trade are mostly equipped with knife, cycle chains ,car belts for self protection and to exhort their fare from the reluctant customers) has been so punished so that in future those who pilfer trash may at least live.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Loading Facebook Comments ...
Loading Disqus Comments ...