Daily Legal PCS (J) Judiciary Answer Writing Progamme –

Question:-  In  the Indian Penal Code and state the extent to which it may mitigate the  responsibility of the accused for the offence of murder.”.

Model  Answer:

In Indian law, “grave and sudden provocation” is a crucial aspect that can mitigate the culpability of an accused for the offense of murder. This concept is outlined in Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which defines murder, and Section 299 which lays down exceptions to murder, including grave and sudden provocation.

According to Section 300, culpable homicide amounts to murder if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

However, there are exceptions laid down in Section 299, one of which is grave and sudden provocation.

The Indian courts have established certain principles regarding grave and sudden provocation:

Grave Provocation: The provocation must be serious enough to induce a reasonable person to lose self-control. It should be of such a nature that it would impair the ordinary person’s power of self-control.

Sudden Provocation/Unexpected : The provocation must be sudden and not premeditated. It should not give the accused time to cool down and regain composure.

No Time for Reflection: There must be no time for the accused to cool down and for reason to resume its sway.

Loss of Self-Control: The accused must have actually lost self-control due to the provocation, and the act must have been committed in the heat of passion.

Causation: The provocation must be the direct cause of the act. If there’s a time gap between the provocation and the act, and the accused had time to cool down, the defense of grave and sudden provocation may not hold.

Case laws provide insight into how these principles are applied in practice:

K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962): In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of India considered the plea of grave and sudden provocation. The accused, Nanavati, claimed that he shot his wife’s lover in a fit of passion upon discovering their affair. The court held that the circumstances constituted grave and sudden provocation, and thus reduced the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

In the case of Mahmood vs State, it was held that the provocation must be unexpected, and if the accused plans in advance to receive a provocation to justify the subsequent homicide, the defense of grave and sudden provocation will not apply.

Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001):.Explain brifly

Case : Nirmala Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh ( Aug 2023)

The SC altered the conviction from Section 302 of the IPC to Part-I of Section 304 of the IPC.

Conclusion :

Thus , The law recognizes that in certain circumstances, an individual might act in the heat of passion due to grave and sudden provocation, leading to the loss of self-control and resulting in an act that would otherwise be considered murder. In such cases, the culpability of the accused may be mitigated to culpable homicide not amounting to murder

Note : the model answer is not the exact answer u r supposed to write in real exam. U hv to concise /incorporate the points as per demand of the question & word limit.