Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Nov 06, 2007
ePaper
Google



National
News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |



National Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Rag-picker’s killing: life term reduced

New Delhi: Throwing waste into someone’s place is a “grave and sudden provocation,” and a person who kills such an offender cannot be convicted for murder, the Supreme Court has said.

In such a case, the accused can be convicted only for the offence of “culpable homicide not amounting to murder,” it said, while reducing the life sentence of the accused charged with killing a person over a dispute.

“In our opinion, throwing waste and rubbish inside the house or shop of somebody is certainly a grave and sudden provocation. Everyone wishes to keep his premises neat and clean, and is likely to lose his self-control in such a situation,” a Bench of Justices A.K. Mathur and Markandeya Katju observed.

Case in question

The Bench made the observation, while reducing to five-year rigorous imprisonment the life sentence of Muthu, an employee of a paper merchant in Tamil Nadu, who stabbed to death rag-picker Siva on April 9, 1998, after the latter allegedly threw rubbish into the shop.

According to the prosecution, after Siva threw the rubbish, an altercation ensued during which Muthu picked up a knife in the shop and stabbed the former.

A trial court had convicted Muthu to life imprisonment under IPC Section 302 (murder), which was affirmed by the Madras High Court.

However, the Supreme Court reasoned that Muthu’s offence fell under Exception 4 of Section 300 (IPC section defines murder and culpable homicide).

It noted that the murder was not pre-meditated. “If rubbish is thrown into one’s house or shop, one would naturally get very upset. It is evident that the accused had no motive or intention to cause death to the deceased since the accused was not carrying the knife from before and only picked it up during the scuffle with the deceased,” the Bench observed. — PTI

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail



National

News: ePaper | Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary | Updates: Breaking News |

ICICI Bank


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu