Killing in the heat of passion, not murder: Cal HC trims life terms

Kolkata: Holding that a fatal assault arising out of a sudden family quarrel over the care of aged parents was not a premeditated act of murder, the Calcutta High Court has converted the conviction of two brothers from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder and ordered their release after 14 years in custody.

A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta observed that the brothers had assembled at their ancestral house shortly after their father distributed property among the siblings. The meeting was convened to decide who would feed and maintain their parents. When talks broke down over a proposed rotational arrangement, tempers flared, and violence followed.

The court noted that the accused had arrived at the meeting unarmed. According to evidence on record, they briefly left and returned within about three minutes with household implements, including a hasua and a bhojali, and assaulted two of their brothers. One succumbed to his injuries, while the other survived.

The Bench held that the brief interval between the quarrel and the assault was insufficient to infer a cold-blooded plan to kill. The weapons used were described as ordinary rural household implements, and there was no evidence of prior deliberation or conspiracy. The prosecution itself had not alleged premeditation. Medical evidence showed four injuries on the deceased, including injuries to vital parts such as the neck, scalp, and lung. However, the doctor testified that timely medical intervention might have saved him. The court also noted that both brothers were assaulted during the same episode, but only one died, casting doubt on any specific intention to kill one while sparing the other.

While acknowledging certain investigative lapses and inconsistencies in witness accounts, the Bench found that the occurrence of the assault was established by eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence.

Concluding that the case fell under Section 304 Part I of the IPC, the court set aside the conviction under Section 302 and the life sentence imposed by the trial court. The two appellants were sentenced to the period already undergone and directed to be released upon execution of bonds in accordance with the law.