Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on 11.08.2026

Pronounced on 01.09.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA

and

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.MURUGESAN

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

Karuppaiah ... Appellant

vs.

The Inspector of Police,

Watrap Police Station,

Virudhunagar District ... Respondent

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., to call for the

records relating to the judgment dated 20.11.2023 made in S.C.No.52 of 2019 on the

file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Srivilliputhur and set

aside the conviction and sentence imposed as against the appellant/accused and

allow the above appeal.

For Appellant : Mr.S.Vairamuthu

For Mr.R.Vignesh

For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatesh

Counsel for State of Tamil Nadu

(Crl.Side)

____________

Page 1 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

J U D G M E N T

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.

The instant criminal appeal is filed by the sole accused (hereinafter

respectively referred to as “the appellant” ) seeking to set aside the judgment of

conviction and sentence dated 20.11.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast

Track Mahila Court, Srivilliputhur (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court”) in

S.C.No.52 of 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned judgment”).

2. Vide the impugned judgment, the Trial Court convicted the appellant and

sentenced him as tabulated below:

Penal ProvisionImprisonment Fine amount

449 of IPC Seven years Rigorous

Imprisonment

Rs.1,000/- in default of which to

undergo three months rigorous

imprisonment

326 of IPC Ten years Rigorous

Imprisonment

Rs.2,000/- in default of which to

undergo four months rigorous

imprisonment

324 of IPC Three years Rigorous

Imprisonment

Rs.1,000/- in default of which to

undergo three months rigorous

imprisonment

506(ii) of IPCSeven years Rigorous

Imprisonment

Rs.1,000/- in default of which to

undergo three months rigorous

imprisonment

302 of IPC Life ImprisonmentRs.3,000/- in default of which to

undergo six months rigorous

imprisonment

Period of detention already undergone by the appellant was ordered to be set off

and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

____________

Page 2 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

3.The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is as follows:

3.1.The deceased Kausalya is the wife of the appellant and their marriage

was solemnized two years prior to the occurrence. Through their wedlock, a male

child, namely, Kavinesh, was born to them. The appellant used to pick up quarrels

with the deceased by suspecting her fidelity.

3.2.While so, on 24.09.2018, the appellant quarrelled with the deceased,

suspecting her character. Hence, the parents of the deceased, P.W.1 (cousin of the

deceased) and the family members of the appellant, along with the village elders,

conducted a Panchayat (mediation talk) at the house of the appellant at Eravakkadu.

The elders advised the appellant to lead a peaceful matrimonial life without

harassing the deceased.

3.3.On 26.09.2018, the deceased purchased milk for her mother, who was

also residing in the same village. After giving the milk, she was talking with her

mother. On seeing this, the appellant shouted at her and warned her that if she goes

to her mother's house again, he would chop her leg. Fearing the appellant's conduct,

the deceased, along with her child, informed her parents about the threat made by the

appellant.

____________

Page 3 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

3.4.On 27.09.2018, at about 10.00 a.m., the elders again conducted a

Panchayat/mediation at the house of the appellant, during which the deceased

informed them that since the appellant had humiliated her mother, she was not

inclined to live with him. She further informed them that her parents were searching

for a house at Sivakasi and that she intended to reside with her parents for some time

and thereafter, return to her husband's house when he calls her to lead a matrimonial

life. Hence, the elders accepted the same and advised the deceased to live with her

parents for some time.

3.5.Thereafter, the deceased requested P.W.1 that she would stay at her

house until her parents arranged a house at Viswanatham. P.W.1 accepted the same

and took the deceased and her child to her house. Enraged by the deceased's decision

to go to Viswanatham Village, the appellant decided to do away with the deceased.

3.6.On 01.10.2018, at about 1.45 p.m., P.W.1, her two children, P.W.

3/Mareeswari and the deceased were sleeping in the inner hall of the house of P.W.1,

the deceased's senior paternal uncle, Thangamudi/P.W.2 was sleeping in the kitchen;

at that time, the appellant, with an intention to murder the deceased, armed with an

aruval, unlawfully entered the house of P.W.1. On seeing the appellant entering with

an aruval, Thangamudi/P.W.2, restrained the appellant from entering the house. The

____________

Page 4 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

appellant attacked P.W.2 with the aruval on his left wrist and caused injuries to him.

Due to pain, P.W.2 raised an alarm. On hearing his cries, P.W.1 and P.W.3 woke up.

At that time, the appellant shouted at the deceased saying that she is a whore and that

his problem will get solved if only she dies and forcibly attacked her with the aruval

on her left chest. When P.W.1 tried to prevent the appellant from attacking the

deceased, the appellant threatened P.W.1 to run away, otherwise he would kill her

also. However, when P.W.1 attempted to snatch the aruval from the appellant, the

appellant attacked P.W.1 with the aruval on her left upper arm and left forearm,

causing injuries to her. Subsequently, the appellant again attacked the deceased on

her left back and inflicted grievous injuries.

3.7.Immediately thereafter, when P.W.1 and P.W.3 raised alarm by

screaming, the appellant ran away from the house. Subsequently, P.W.1, P.W.2 and

the deceased were taken to the hospital. However, the deceased succumbed to the

injuries on her way to hospital due to severe bleeding caused owing to the injuries

inflicted by the appellant. Hence, the case.

3.8.Based on a complaint (Ex.P.1) given by P.W.1, a case was registered by

Selvakumar (P.W.18), Sub Inspector of Police, in Watrap P.S.Cr.No.314 of 2018

against the appellant for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324, 302 and 506(II)

IPC.

____________

Page 5 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

4.After examining various witnesses and collecting reports from the

experts, the Investigation Officer (PW23) completed the investigation and filed a

final report against the appellant for the offences under Sections 449, 326, 324,

506(ii) and 302 of IPC which was taken on file in P.R.C. No. 03 of 2019 before the

learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Srivilliputhur.

5.On appearance of the appellant and compliance of provisions of Section

207, Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Srivilliputhur, committed the case

to the Court of Session, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, which made over the

case to the Trial Court where the case was taken up as S.C. No.52 of 2019.

6.After hearing the appellant, the Trial Court framed charges against the

appellant for having committed the offences under Sections 449,326,506(ii), 324 and

302 of IPC. When the charges were read over and explained to the appellant, he

pleaded not guilty and sought to be tried.

7.In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined 23 witnesses and

marked 16 exhibits and 9 material objects.

____________

Page 6 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

8.After examination of the prosecution witnesses, when the appellant was

questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. on the incriminating circumstances

appearing against him, he denied the same as false without offering any explanation

whatsoever and he did not examine any witness or mark any document on his side.

9.The Trial Court, after hearing the arguments on both sides, found the

appellant guilty and convicted and sentenced him as tabulated at paragraph 2, supra,

vide the impugned judgment and challenging the conviction and sentence, the instant

criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant.

10.The case of the prosecution, as narrated through the key prosecution

witnesses, is briefly stated as follows:

10.1.Sindhu @ Chinnammal (PW1) deposed that she is the cousin of the

deceased; ever since the deceased was married to the appellant, he has been

continuously causing trouble. A panchayat was conducted twice to resolve the issues

between the appellant and the deceased; however, even after the panchayat, the

appellant did not give heed to the wise words of the panchayatars ; On 30.09.2018,

the appellant doubted the deceased for her adulterous conduct and hence, he

quarrelled with the deceased; during the quarrel, he threatened to chop her leg if she

____________

Page 7 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

goes to her mother’s house; when the deceased asked him as to why she must refrain

from going to her mother’s house, the appellant informed her that it was her mother

who was enabling the act of adultery; hence, at about 3:30 p.m., the deceased came

to her house along with her children; on 01.10.2018 at about 1:45 a.m., when her

uncle Thangamuni was sleeping in the kitchen and when she, her two children, the

deceased, and the deceased’s mother were sleeping in the hall, the appellant burst

open the doors and attacked Thangamuni P.W.2 on his wrist and further attacked the

deceased on her left chest stating that only if he kills her, the problem would come to

an end. When she attempted to stop the appellant, he asked her to leave by

threatening that he would kill her also but as she persisted in her attempt, the

appellant cut her left elbow. Seeing them screaming in pain, their neighbours

contacted the ambulance and they were taken to the Vathirairupu Government

Hospital. The doctor, on examining the deceased, concluded that she was dead and

thereafter, the deceased was sent to the mortuary. She gave her nighty (M.O.1) to the

police and identified the deceased’s clothes and the weapon.

10.2.Arumugam (PW.13), Village Administrative Officer of Ilanthaikulam,

deposed that on 01.10.2018 while he was on duty, at about 04.00 p.m., the Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Rajapalayam, sent a person and called him; he was taken to

the coconut grove and the Deputy Superintendent of Police was present there; the

appellant took out and handed over one aruval, one knife and one shirt near the teak

____________

Page 8 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

tree; seizure mahazhar was prepared and he attested in the seizure mahazhar. The

signature in the seizure mahazhar is marked as Ex.P.4.

10.3.Dr. Beno Augustine Raja (PW.15), Assistant Surgeon, deposed that

while he was working as an Assistant Director in Thoothukudi ESI Hospital, he

conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased and noted down the following

injuries:

“1)a deep laceration in left chest below the clavicle between 1st

inter coastal muscle (length -9 cm, depth 11cm, width-3 cm)

2) Laceration in the back just above left scapula (length 3 cm,

width - 1cm, depth -5cm) stomach- 100 ml-undigested food, Kidney,

liver,spleen- Pale; small intestine - no content.

and issued postmortem certificate (Ex.P.6) opining that the deceased would

appeared to have died of haemorrhagic shock due to large artery injury and

the deceased would have died before 12- 15 hrs. from the time of post

mortem.

10.4.Dr.Mohan Kumar (PW.16) deposed that he was working as Senior

Assistant Surgeon; on 01.10.2018, while he was on duty in Watrap Government

Hospital, at about 2.55 a.m., Kausalya was brought in an ambulance; she sustained

injuries on her left side chest, left side shoulder and she was brought dead; he sent

the body of the deceased to mortuary; he issued Accident Register (Ex.P.7); in the

same ambulance, one Chinnammal was also brought and she stated that on the same

day at about 01.45 a.m., she was assaulted by one person with aruval and the doctor

____________

Page 9 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

noted some abrasions in her left hand; he issued Accident Register (Ex.P.8); one

Thangamudi also informed that one known person assaulted him at about 3.15 am.,

and he was referred to Virudhunagar Government Hospital for further treatment; he

found fracture of two bones called radis and ulna; he issued Accident Register

(Ex.P.9).

10.5.Raja (PW 20), Deputy Superintendent of Police, deposed that he took

up the case for further investigation from Selvakumar (PW 18) and went to the place

of occurrence and examined Sindhu, Ponnaiah, Arumugam, Senthil Kumar,

Sundaravadivel, Selvakumar and recorded their statements; on 05.10.2018, he

enquired Seeniammal, Selvaraj, Sankar, Ponraj, Rengasamy Nadar, Kokila, Ramaraj

and recorded their statements; on 13.11.2018, he enquired the Revenue Divisional

Officer, Sivakasi and recorded his statement; he submitted a report stating that there

is no dowry demand.

10.6.Dr.Ishwarya (PW22) Assistant Surgeon, Kovilpatti, deposed that on

01.10.2018, while she was on duty, one Thangamudi was brought to the hospital and

he stated that at about 1.45 a.m., a known person had assaulted him with an aruval on

his hand; he was initially treated in Watrap Government Hospital and thereafter,

referred to Virudhunagar Government Hospital for further treatment; he issued

Accident Register (Ex.P.13)

____________

Page 10 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

10.7.Marichamy (PW23), Inspector of Police, deposed that in the year 2018,

while he was serving in the Police Department, a case was registered in connection

with the death of one Kausalya for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b),

324, 302 and 506(2) IPC; the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, conducted an

enquiry into the death of the deceased and submitted a report; thereafter, the

investigation was taken over by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputhur

Sub-Division; during the course of investigation, the witnesses were examined and

their statements were recorded; based on the materials collected during investigation,

an alteration report was prepared on 05.12.2018, altering the offences from Sections

294(b), 324, 302 and 506(ii) IPC to Sections 449, 324, 326, 302 and 506(2) IPC, and

the same was forwarded to the jurisdictional Court; the relevant material objects

connected with the occurrence were recovered and sent for scientific examination;

the forensic examination reports were subsequently received; after completion of the

investigation and after collecting the oral, documentary and scientific evidence, the

final report was filed before the jurisdictional Court against the accused for the

aforesaid offences.

11.The sum and substance of the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the appellants are as follows:

i) The prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond

reasonable doubt and the trial Court, without taking into consideration the

____________

Page 11 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

contradictions, improvements and embellishments in the evidence of witnesses, erred

in convicting the appellant.

ii)Except PW.1, all the other independent witnesses have turned hostile,

especially PW.2, the alleged injured witness who is none other than the senior

paternal uncle of the deceased and PW.3, mother of the deceased who are projected

as eye witnesses to the occurrence, have not supported the case of prosecution; in

such circumstances, the trial Court erred in convicting the appellant based on the

evidence of PW.1 which is totally unreliable. When P.W 2 has not supported the case

of the prosecution with regard to the alleged assault by the appellant on him, the trial

court erred in convicting the appellant for the charge under Section 326 of IPC.

iii)When admittedly the prosecution has failed to recover the clothes of

PW1 said to be stained by blood at the time of occurrence, her presence at the place

of occurrence is highly doubtful and thereby the trial court erred in convicting the

appellant based on her solitary evidence which is totally unreliable.

iv)The arrest, recovery and confession are doubtful and further the delay in

sending the FIR to the Court had resulted in embellishments and improvements.

v)In the alternative, even as per the prosecution, there used to be constant

fight and quarrel between the appellant and the deceased due to the appellant

suspecting the fidelity of the deceased and the appellant coming to know that the

victim was staying in his cousin P.W.1's house had gone there in search of her during

which time the incident had happened and the injury on the chest below the clavicle

____________

Page 12 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

has resulted in a cut to the artery and the death is due to that . Further since the death

had happened within seven years of marriage, enquiry regarding the death was

conducted by the Revenue Divisional Officer who concluded that the death was not

on account of demand of dowry and that the witnesses who have been examined

have also deposed that there used to be frequent quarrels due to suspicion of fidelity

and that on the date of occurrence, the appellant coming to know that his wife was

staying along with the child in her cousin (PW1's) house along with her mother and

uncle, had gone to the house while returning from work and a quarrel ensued

during which time the incident had happened. The appellant had not taken undue

advantage. Further strangely, in this case, finding that the appellant is not at fault,

PW3/mother of the victim and PW.2/Senior paternal uncle of the deceased have not

supported the case of the prosecution and they have been treated hostile. The case of

criminal trespass and intimidation have also not been proved by legal evidence.

vi)The incident is a result of frustration and provocation and the appellant

had committed culpable homicide while under loss of self-control without any

premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and

thus, the act of the appellant will bring the case under the exception 4 of 300 of IPC

and would pray for a lesser sentence.

12.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent

would submit that though the other ocular witnesses including PW.2, injured witness

____________

Page 13 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

who is the senior paternal uncle of the deceased and PW.3/ mother of the deceased

and other independent witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution, the

evidence of PW.1 who is a relative of both the deceased and the appellant is cogent

and clear. PW1 had vividly deposed about the incident and she is also an injured

witness. When the evidence of PW.1 is clear, the non recovery of saree which is the

flaw in the investigation will not affect the case of the prosecution. The trial Court,

rightly finding that her testimony remained unshattered, had based the conviction,

relying on her evidence. Therefore, he would pray for dismissal of the appeal.

13.This Court gave its careful and anxious consideration to the rival

contentions and thoroughly scanned through the entire evidence available on record,

including the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence.

14.Now what is to be seen is:

i) Whether the prosecution has proved the case of uxoricide beyond

reasonable doubt? and if so,

ii) Whether the case of the appellant will fall within Exception 4 of

Section 300 of IPC?

15.As could be discerned from the records, the case of the prosecution is

that the deceased is the wife of the appellant. Due to frequent quarrels between the

____________

Page 14 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

duo on account of suspicion of infidelity, they got separated few days prior to the

occurrence and the deceased was living in the house of PW.1 at Viswanatham

Village. While so, on 01.10.2018, while the deceased, P.W 1 who is the cousin of the

deceased, P.W 2 the paternal uncle of the deceased and P.W3 the mother of the

deceased were in the house of P.W1, the appellant is said to have trespassed into the

house of PW.1 and when PW.2 who was sleeping in the front room had prevented

his entry the appellant had caused grievous injuries on PW.2 and thereafter abused

the deceased and when PW.1 had intervened intimidated PW.1 and when PW.1

attempted to snatch the aruval attacked PW.1 and in continuation of the same

assaulted the deceased with aruval on her chest and back her resulting in her death.

16. On the side of the prosecution. PW.1, PW.2, paternal uncle of the deceased

and PW.3 mother of the deceased are said to be eye witnesses. Strangely PW.2

despite being said to be injured and PW.3 the mother of the deceased have not

supported the case of prosecution and they have been treated hostile. Though PW.2

during cross examination spoken about the earlier mediation between the appellant

and the deceased he had totally denied having been present at the scene of

occurrence and having seen the occurrence. Further PW.3 the mother of the

deceased as stated above has not supported the case of the prosecution and nothing

worthwhile has been elicited from her during cross examination. Likewise all the

independent witnesses namely PW.4 to PW. 11 who are the neighbours have not

____________

Page 15 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

supported the case of prosecution and they have been treated hostile. When the other

independent witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution this Court has

to carefully analyze the evidence of PW.1 to find out whether the solitary evidence of

PW.1 regarding the evidence is reliable. As stated above PW.1 is the relative of the

deceased as well as the appellant. She has deposed that on the date of occurrence

PW.2, her uncle was sleeping in the front portion and that the appellant entered into

the house and assaulted him and the appellant is also said to have quarrelled with the

deceased and inflicted a single injury in the left chest and that when she attempted

to snatch the aruval she sustained injuries and since he raised alarm the villagers had

rushed there. She has also admitted about the dispute between the appellant and his

wife and the quarrel on the previous day. Her evidence regarding forced entry into

the house / criminal trespass and intimidating her is also not clear.

17. PW.12 has been examined for preparation of observation mahazhar and the

recovery mahazhar. PW.13 is the Village Administrative Officer who has deposed

about recovery of aruval (M.O.1), blood stained shirt(M.O.8) and lungi (M.O.9)

under Athatchi (Ex.P.4). The Village Assistant (PW.14) has deposed about having

attested the confession pursuant to which M.Os.5,8 and 9 were recovered and the

admitted portion of the confession(Ex.P.5). PW.15 is the doctor who had conducted

autopsy. PW.16 is the doctor who has issued accident register(Ex.P.7) regarding the

deceased, accident register of PW.1(Ex.P.8) and accident register of PW.2 (Ex.P.9).

____________

Page 16 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

He had in his cross examination admitted that the injuries sustained by PW.1 could

be due to fall and the injuries on PW.2 could be due to tripping and falling on thin

sheets or glass. PW.17 is the police constable who had assisted in the investigation

conducted by the Investigation Officer. PW.18 is the Sub Inspector of Police who has

registered First Information Report. PW.19 is the officer who conducted

investigation due to the absence of PW.20. PW.20 is the Deputy Superintendent of

Police. PW.21 who was examined to prove the purchase of aruval by the appellant

has not supported the case of prosecution and he has been treated hostile. PW.22 is

the doctor who had given further treatment to PW.2 and issued Ex.P.13 with regard

to fractures sustained by PW.2.

18. The prosecution by the evidence of PW.1 had proved that the appellant

had inflicted injury on the deceased with aruval and as per Ex.P.12/Post mortem

certificate and the evidence of PW.12 it has been proved that the victim succumbed

to the injuries sustained in the occurrence.

19. Now this Court has to see whether the act of the appellant will fall within

the exception to Section 300 of IPC.

20.In this regard, before analysing the facts and circumstances of the case,

it would be useful to refer to the judgment in Dauvaram Nirmalkar v. State of

____________

Page 17 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

Chhatisgarh, reported in (2023) 12 SCC 541, wherein the Apex Court, while

recognizing the theory of sustained provocation, has held as under:

“10. Interpreting Exception 1 to the Section 300 in K.M.

Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra,10 this Court has held that the

conditions which have to be satisfied for the exception to be invoked

are (a) the deceased must have given provocation to the accused; (b)

the provocation must be grave; (c) the provocation must be sudden;(d)

the offender, by the reason of the said provocation, should have been

deprived of his power of self-control; (e) the offender should have

killed the deceased during the continuance of the deprivation of power

of self-control; and (f) the offender must have caused the death of the

person who gave the provocation or the death of any other person by

mistake or accident. For determining 10 1962 Supp (1) SCR

567.whether or not the provocation had temporarily deprived the

offender from the power of self-control, the test to be applied is that of

a reasonable man and not that of an unusually excitable and

pugnacious individual. Further, it must be considered whether there

was sufficient interval and time to allow the passion to cool. K.M.

Nanavati (supra) succinctly observes:

“84. Is there any standard of a reasonable man for

the application of the doctrine of “grave and sudden”

provocation? No abstract standard of reasonableness can

be laid down. What a reasonable man will do in certain

circumstances depends upon the customs, manners, way

of life, traditional values etc.; in short, the cultural,

social and emotional background of the society to which

an accused belongs. In our vast country there are social

groups ranging from the lowest to the highest state of

civilization. It is neither possible nor desirable to lay

down any standard with precision: it is for the court to

decide in each case, having regard to the relevant

circumstances. It is not necessary in this case to ascertain

whether a reasonable man placed in the position of the

accused would have lost his self-control momentarily or

even temporarily when his wife confessed to him of her

illicit intimacy with another, for we are satisfied on the

evidence that the accused regained his self-control and

killed Ahuja deliberately.

85. The Indian law, relevant to the present

enquiry, may be stated thus:

____________

Page 18 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

(1) The test of “grave and sudden” provocation is

whether a reasonable man, belonging to the same class

of society as the accused, placed in the situation in which

the accused was placed would be so provoked as to lose

his self-control.

(2) In India, words and gestures may also, under

certain circumstances, cause grave and sudden

provocation to an accused so as to bring his act within

the First Exception to of the Indian Penal Code.

(3) The mental background created by the

previous act of the victim may be taken into

consideration in ascertaining whether the subsequent act

caused grave and sudden provocation for committing the

offence.

(4) The fatal blow should be clearly traced to the

influence of passion arising from that provocation and

not after the passion had cooled down by lapse of time,

or otherwise giving room and scope for premeditation

and calculation.”

11.K.M. Nanavati (supra), has held that the mental

background created by the previous act(s) of the deceased may be

taken into consideration in ascertaining whether the subsequent act

caused sudden and grave provocation for committing the offence.

There can be sustained and continuous provocations over a period of

time, albeit in such cases Exception 1 to of the IPC applies when

preceding the offence, there was a last act, word or gesture in the

series of incidents comprising of that conduct, amounting to sudden

provocation sufficient for reactive loss of self-control. K.M. Nanavati

(supra) quotes the definition of ‘provocation’ given by Goddard, C.J.;

in R. v. Duffy,as :

““...some act or series of acts, done by the dead

man to the accused which would cause in any reasonable

person, and actually causes in the accused, a sudden and

temporary loss of self control, rendering the accused so

subject to passion as to make him or her for the moment

not master of his own mind...[I] indeed, circumstances

which induce a desire for revenge are inconsistent with

provocation, since the conscious formulation of a desire

____________

Page 19 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

for revenge means that the person had the time to think,

to reflect, and that would negative a sudden temporary

loss of self control which is of the essence of

provocation...”.

12.The question of loss of self-control by grave and sudden

provocation is a question of fact. Act of provocation and loss of self-

control, must be actual and reasonable. The law attaches great

importance to two things when defence of provocation is taken under

Exception 1 to of the IPC. First, whether there was an intervening

period for the passion to cool and for the accused to regain dominance

and control over his mind. Secondly, the mode of resentment should

bear some relationship to the sort of provocation that has been given.

The retaliation should be proportionate to the provocation.

12.The first part lays emphasis on whether the accused

acting as a reasonable man had time to reflect and cool down. The

offender is presumed to possess the general power of self-control of an

ordinary or reasonable man, belonging to the same class of society as

the accused, placed in the same situation in which the accused is

placed, to temporarily lose the power of self-control. The second part

emphasises that the offender’s reaction to the provocation is to be

judged on the basis of whether the provocation was sufficient to bring

about a loss of self-control in the fact situation. Here again, the court

12 See the opinion expressed by Goddar, CJ. in R v. Duffy (supra)

would have to apply the test of a reasonable person in the

circumstances. While examining these questions, we should not be

short-sighted, and must take into account the whole of the events,

including the events on the day of the fatality, as these are relevant for

deciding whether the accused was acting under the cumulative and

continuing stress of provocation. Gravity of provocation turns upon

the whole of the victim’s abusive behaviour towards the accused.

Gravity does not hinge upon a single or last act of provocation deemed

sufficient by itself to trigger the punitive action. Last provocation has

to be considered in light of the previous provocative acts or words,

serious enough to cause the accused to lose his self-control. The

cumulative or sustained provocation test would be satisfied when the

accused’s retaliation was immediately preceded and precipitated by

some sort of provocative conduct, which would satisfy the

requirement of sudden or immediate provocation.

13.Thus, the gravity of the provocation can be assessed by

taking into account the history of the abuse and need not be confined

to the gravity of the final provocative act in the form of acts, words or

____________

Page 20 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

gestures. The final wrongdoing, triggering off the accused’s reaction,

should be identified to show that there was temporary loss of self-

control and the accused had acted without planning and premeditation.

This has been aptly summarised by Ashworth in the following

words:“[T]he significance of the deceased’s final act should be

considered by reference to the previous relations between the parties,

taking into account any previous incidents which add colour to the

final act. This is not to argue that the basic distinction between sudden

provoked killings and revenge killings should be blurred, for the lapse

of time between the deceased’s final act and the accused’s retaliation

should continue to tell against him. The point is that the significance

of the deceased’s final act and its effect upon the accused – and indeed

the relation of the retaliation to that act – can be neither understood

nor evaluated without reference to previous dealings between the

parties.” Exception 1 to Section 300 recognises that when a reasonable

person is tormented continuously, he may, at one point of time, erupt

and reach a break point whereby losing self-control, going astray and

committing the offence. However, sustained provocation principle

does not do away with the requirement of immediate or the final

provocative act, words or gesture, which should be verifiable. Further,

this defence would not be available if there is evidence of reflection or

planning as they mirror exercise of calculation and premeditation.

14.Following the view expressed in K.M. Nanavati (supra),

this Court in observed that in the test for application of Exception 1 to

f the IPC, the primary obligation of the court is to examine the

circumstances from the point of view of a person of reasonable

prudence, if there was such grave and sudden provocation, as to

reasonably conclude that a person placed in such circumstances can

temporarily lose self-control and commit the offence in the proximity

to the time of provocation. A significant observation in (supra) is that

the provocation may be an act or series of acts done by the deceased to

the accused resulting in inflicting of the injury. The idea behind this

exception is to exclude the acts of violence which are premeditated,

and not to deny consideration of circumstances such as prior animosity

between the deceased and the accused, arising as a result of incidents

in the past and subsequently resulting in sudden and grave

provocation. In support of the aforesaid proposition and to convert the

conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part I of the IPC in Budhi

Singh (supra), the Court also relied upon Rampal Singh v. State of

Uttar Pradesh”

15. For clarity, it must be stated that the prosecution must prove

the guilt of the accused, that is, it must establish all ingredients of the

____________

Page 21 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

offence with which the accused is charged, but this burden should not

be mixed with the burden on the accused of proving that the case falls

within an exception. However, to discharge this burden the accused may

rely upon the case of the prosecution and the evidence adduced by the

prosecution in the court. It is in this context we would refer to the case

of the prosecution, which is that the deceased was addicted to alcohol

and used to constantly torment, abuse and threaten the appellant. On the

night of the occurrence, the deceased had consumed alcohol and had

told the appellant to leave the house and if not, he would kill the

appellant. There was sudden loss of self-control on account of a ‘slow

burn’ reaction followed by the final and immediate provocation. There

was temporary loss of self-control as the appellant had tried to kill

himself by holding live electrical wires. Therefore, we hold that the acts

of provocation on the basis of which the appellant caused the death of

his brother, Dashrath Nirmalkar, were both sudden and grave and that

there was loss of self-control.”

21.As stated above, though PW.2 and PW.3 uncle and mother of the

deceased have not supported the case of prosecution they have spoken about the

dispute between the appellant and the deceased on account of suspicion of infidelity

by the deceased. The evidence of P.W.1 also corroborates with regard to the same.

In such circumstances it is all the more probable that the appellant who was kept

away by his wife, would have committed the offence in a fret of anger, frustration

and deep depression which is quite a normal human conduct and the reasons for such

behaviour being denial of conjugal companionship or forced isolation is very much

understandable. It will not be out of place to state here that in a marital bond, the

abrupt or systematic withholding of cohabitation can act as a form of severe

emotional trauma and the appellant having gone to the house of PW.1 had quarrelled

with his wife and the incident had happened during such time. It is also to be noted

____________

Page 22 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

that PW. 3 mother of the deceased and PW. 2 uncle of the deceased(alleged injured

witness) who were present have not supported the case of prosecution. The

incident had happened during the quarrel when the appellant is said to have had a

sudden loss of self control. Since PW.21 has turned hostile the fact of the appellant

having brought the weapon along with him has also not been proved. The appellant

has also not taken undue advantage. Since PW.2 has not supported the case of the

prosecution the charge against the appellant for offence under Section 326 of IPC

stands not proved the appellant stands acquitted for the offence under Section 326 of

IPC. However since the evidence of PW. 1 with regard to the injuries sustained by

her is clear, the appellant is found guilty for offence under Section 324 of IPC.

Since there is lack of evidence for the offences under Sections 449 and 506(2) of

IPC the appellant stands acquitted for the above said charges.

22.Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the manner

in which the offence was committed and by applying the ratio laid down by the Apex

Court in Dauvaram Nirmalkar, supra, to the facts of the present case, we are of the

opinion that the case of the appellant falls within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.

23.In view of the above, this criminal appeal stands partly allowed. In the

result, the conviction under Section 302 IPC is set aside and instead, the appellant is

convicted under Section 304 (II) IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous

____________

Page 23 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months. The appellant is also

found guilty for offence under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo three

years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and indefault to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The sentences shall run

concurrently and the period of sentence already undergone by the appellant is

ordered to set off as per Section 428 of Cr.P.C., The fine amounts, if any, paid in

respect of offences under Sections 449,326,506(2) of IPC shall be refunded to the

appellant.

[A.D.J.C.,J.] [B.M.,J]

01 .09.2026

NCC : Yes/No

Index : Yes/No

Internet : Yes/No

aav

To

1.The Sessions Judge

Fast Track Mahila Court

Srivilliputhur

2.The Inspector of Police

Watrap Police Station, Virudhunagar District

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai

4. The Section Officer

Criminal Section (Records)

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

Madurai

____________

Page 24 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

and

B.MURUGESAN, J.

aav

Pre Delivery Judgment made

in

Crl.A(MD) No.468 of 2024

01.09.2026

____________

Page 25 of 25 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis