Supreme Court Alters Murder Conviction to Culpable Homicide in Agricultural Land Dispute Case.


26 September 2025 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law  

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court recently modified the conviction of four men who had been found guilty of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment in connection with a land dispute that took place nearly four decades ago.

The case traces back to an incident on 6 August 1986, when members of a family had gone to measure fields for partition in Karvi (Banda district, Uttar Pradesh). As per the prosecution, there was a dispute with the neighboring property holders, leading to a scuffle. With sticks and agricultural implements in hand, the accused attacked three men—Ram Avtar, Namo Shankar, and Girija Shankar—who died subsequently from their injuries. An FIR was initially lodged under sections related to attempt to murder, but was subsequently amended to add charges of murder since the victims had died on the same day.


 

 

The Trial Court in 1989 convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced them to life imprisonment. This conviction was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court in 2013. The case then came to the Supreme Court through a special leave petition filed by the convicts.

On arguments, appellants' counsel argued that the case relied heavily on the evidence of a single related witness and the severity of injuries indicated lack of intention to commit murder. The State, however, stood in defence of the concurrent verdicts of the lower courts and highlighted the cruelty of the assault.

On reviewing the evidence, the Supreme Court noted that though the accused carried sharp-edged weapons, they only utilized the blunt part of these instruments. Medical evidence also supported that the wounds were lacerated and contused, but none of them were incised wounds. The Court added that though the accused did so in knowledge that their conduct would probably cause death, there was not enough evidence of such a will to kill.

In line with this, the Court converted the conviction to one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC from murder under Section 302 IPC. Notably, as the appellants had already served over 12 years of imprisonment, the Court ruled that the served sentence was sufficient and directed them to be released.

This judgment reiterates a persistent judicial trend wherein there is a differentiation between intention and knowledge in Indian criminal law. By reducing the conviction to Section 304 Part I, the Court reiterated that lack of definite intent can change the severity of liability in cases of homicide, even though it acknowledged the severity of the assault.

  


Section 302., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Indian Penal Code, 1860