If A Spouse Betrays The Other, This Type Of Incident Will Take Place Due To Sudden Emotion: Meghalaya HC Partly Allows Appeal Of Man Accused Of Killing Wife's Ex-Husband
|The Meghalaya High Court, while partly allowing a criminal appeal filed by a man accused of killing his wife's ex-husband, observed that if one spouse betrays the other, this type of incident will take place due to sudden provocation/ emotion.
The Court also modified the conviction and sentence to the extent that the husband was held guilty of the offence of culpable homicide, not amounting to murder as contemplated under Exception 2 to Section 300 Indian Penal Code, thereby attracting the provisions of Section 304 Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’).
The Division Bench of Chief Justice S. Vaidyanathan and Justice W. Diengdoh observed, “But, from the above, one thing is clear that P.W.3 had accepted that she maintained illicit relationship with her ex-husband / deceased and other witnesses also stated that they noticed the presence of the deceased in the house of P.W.3. In such an event, there is every possibility for a prudent man to lose his temper/self-control, when he sees his wife with some other person in a naked and compromising position, which, though morally justified, but looking at the legal perspective, is not sustained. Therefore, we are satisfied that the commission of the offence by the appellant squarely falls under the provisions of Exception 2 of Section 300.”
Advocate Philemon Nongbri appeared for the Appellant-husband whereas AAG ND Chullai appeared for the Respondents.
The Court held, “For the foregoing discussions and on analysis of the entire circumstances and evidence, we are convinced that the facts of the present case falls under Exception 2 of Section 300 on the ground of “unintentional” and consequently, it is a culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Thus, in our considered opinion, the conviction and sentence passed by the Court below requires modification, as the facts of the present case clearly falls under Exception 2 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code and therefore, the appellant is convicted for “culpable homicide not amounting to murder” and he is sentenced under Section 304 of the Indian Penal code, to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years.”
The brief facts of the case are that the Appellant-husband murdered the ex-husband of his wife with an axe as he saw the ex-husband in his house. The Complainant, son of the deceased ex-husband, filed a complaint regarding the offence. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant-husband under Section 302 of the IPC. The Trial Court had held that the Appellant-husband was entitled to the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. and the period already undergone in prison was ordered to be set off. Aggrieved by the order, the Appellant-husband had preferred the appeal.
The Court further said, “In this case, the wife had betrayed her husband, as she was in a compromising position with her ex-husband as per her own deposition in cross. Merely because the deceased is the ex-husband of the wife of the accused, it does not give her license to maintain her relationship more so illicitly even after her separation from him and in that event, the establishment of reverential trust between the husband and wife by way of marriage would be meaningless as held by the Supreme Court (supra). Thus, we find every justification to convert the offence within the boundary of Exception”
While giving reference to the epic Ramayanam, the Court remarked that Sita was also tested by Rama to prove her chastity by jumping into the fire. “In a sacred relationship, the husband is the property of the wife and vice versa and if one betrays the other, this type of incident will take place due to sudden provocation/emotion.”, the Court said.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal in part and the conviction and sentence were modified. The Court also entitled that the Appellant-husband for set off in accordance with Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the period of detention already undergone by him.
Cause Title: Shri Phot Khaii v. The State of Meghalaya and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024: MLHC:452-DB)
Appearances:
Appellant: Advocates Philemon Nongbri and W.G.R. Mihsil.
Respondents: AAG ND Chullai and GA R Colney