AMJOT ALI MUNSHI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two appellants herein have been convicted under Section 302/34 IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon and they have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life, Altogether 4 persons were made accused for killing one Sarafat Ali in furtherance of their common intention and they had to face the trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon in Sessions Case No, 15(N-M) 77. However, the other two except the appellants were found not guilty by the learned Sessions Judge and they were acquitted.

(2.) While murder is a tragedy, discovery of the murderer beyond doubt is a judicial function. The court is to enquire who the culprits were. Two offences are involved in the killing of a person. They are the offences of culpable homicide and the more heinous offence is murder. What distinguishes these two offences is the presence of a special mens rea which consists of four mental attitudes in the presence of any of which the lesser offence becomes greater. These four mental attitudes are stated in Section 300 I.P.C. in distinguishing murder from culpable homicide. Unless the offence can be said to involve atleast one such mental attitude, it cannot be a murder.

(3.) The first clause says that culpable homicide is murder if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death. The second clause deals with acts done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause death of the person to whom the injury is caused. The mental attitude here is two fold. There is first the intention to cause bodily harm and next there is the objective knowledge that death will be the likely consequence of the intended injury. The third clause discards the test of subjective knowledge. It deals with acts done with the intention of causing bodily injury to a person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. In this clause the result of the intentionally caused injury must be viewed objectively. If the injury that the offender intends causing and thus causes is sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature, the offence is murder whether the offender intended causing death or not and whether the offender had a subjective knowledge of the consequences of the act or not. The fourth clause comprehends dangerous acts which must in all probability cause death.