Criminal Law - Application of Section 300 IPC "Thirdly" and the Distinction Between Murder and Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder (CaseLaws)

Nankaunoo Vs State of U.P. (2016)

Summary of the CaseLaw
The Supreme Court of India addressed an appeal challenging the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The key legal issue involved was:

Applicability of Section 300 IPC "Thirdly" – Whether the act of the appellant, who intentionally caused a firearm injury to the deceased's non-vital part (inner thigh) which resulted in death, fulfilled the criteria for murder under the "thirdly" clause of Section 300 IPC, or constituted the lesser offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC.

The Court held that:
The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC was set aside.
The conviction was altered to one under Section 304 Part I IPC.
The appellant was sentenced to undergo ten years of rigorous imprisonment.

Key Legal Principles Established:
Two-Part Test for Section 300 "Thirdly": To bring a case under the "thirdly" clause of Section 300 IPC, the prosecution must prove: (i) that the accused intended to inflict the very specific bodily injury that was caused, and (ii) that the intended injury was objectively sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

Situs of Injury Determines Burden of Proof: For an injury on a non-vital part of the body, the mere occurrence of death cannot lead to an automatic inference that the injury was sufficient to cause death. In such cases, the prosecution must positively prove this "sufficiency" through specific medical evidence.

Non-Recovery of Weapon is Not Fatal: In the presence of consistent, reliable, and credible eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence, the failure to recover the weapon of offence does not materially weaken the prosecution's case.

Relevance:
This judgment serves as a crucial precedent for applying the nuanced tests under Section 300 IPC, "thirdly". It underscores that establishing murder requires conclusive proof of both the intention to cause a specific injury and the objective sufficiency of that injury to cause death, particularly when the injury is located on a non-vital area. It prevents the mechanical conversion of every homicide into murder and ensures a careful legal qualification of the offence based on established judicial principles.