Unless it is barbaric, torturous and brutal, strangulation of wife cannot be said to be an act of extreme cruelty for denying the benefit of exception 4 to section 300 of IPC

Lisa Coutinho | Pravin Gandhi College of Law | 15th March 2020

Rambir V. State of NCT, Delhi Criminal Appeal No. 839 of 2019

Facts of the case:

In the intervening night of 31.08.2010 and 01.09.2010, the appellant had strangulated his wife – Sua and caused her death on the rooftop. As a result, an FIR was registered against the appellant accusing him under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He was tried by the learned additional sessions judge in Delhi. After examining 18 witnesses, he was found guilty under section 302 of IPC, for murder of his wife. Further, the trial court sentenced the appellant for life imprisonment under section 302 of IPC. The conviction was further challenged in the High Court. The High court too, after considering the judgement and re-appreciating the evidence came to the conclusion that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and stuck to the judgement passed by the trial court. Aggrieved, the appellant again filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of India.

Appellant’s contention:

The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant had no mens rea for killing his wife and that there was no premeditation of any kind. Hence, no case can be made out for convicting the appellant under section 302 of IPC. He submitted that the on that awful night the appellant was in the fit of anger and under the influence of liquor.

Respondent’s contention:

The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the act of picking up of ‘saria’ and compressing forcibly the neck of the wife can by no stretch of imagination be said to be an act committed under the fit of anger.

Judgement:

The Supreme court has overruled the verdict of the inferior courts on the ground that the trial court and high court has erred in passing the conviction judgement. For the case to fall under exception 4 of section 300 of IPC, 4 ingredients are required: (1) There must be a sudden fight; (2) There must be no premeditation; (3) The act was committed in the heat of passion and; (4) The offender has not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner. By conducting the above tests, and the evidence on record, the Court took the view that the case of the appellant falls under the exception 4 of section 302 of IPC.

The conviction recorded against the appellant under section 302 of IPC is liable to be set aside and the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC is modified, as the one under Section 304 Part II, IPC and a sentence of 10 years’ simple imprisonment is imposed on the accused.