Case Title:- NANDKUMAR @ NANDU MANILAL MUDALIAR vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Citation:- 2025 INSC 1302
Date:- 10.11.2025
Hon’ble Supreme Court Bench:- JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN and JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA
The Hon’ble Supreme Court recently changed a man’s conviction from murder (Section 302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part I IPC). The Hon’ble Court said he had no intention to kill, though he knew his act could cause death.
- The case was from Ahmedabad (1998). After a quarrel, the accused went to the victim Louis Williams’ house, abused him, and stabbed him with a knife. Williams died 13 days later from septicemia (infection), not immediately from the injury.
- The Hon’ble Court observed that the attack was done in anger and impulse, not with pre-planned intent to kill. Hence, it was culpable homicide, not murder. The Hon’ble Court explained the key difference between “intention” and “knowledge” under criminal law: Intention means the person wanted to cause death whereas Knowledge means the person was aware that his act could likely cause death, even if he did not desire it.
- Referring to the case Kesar Singh v. State of Haryana (2008), the Hon’ble Court said: If a person acts with intention to cause death or such injury likely to cause death, it falls under Section 304 Part I and, If there is no intention, but only knowledge that the act might cause death, it falls under Section 304 Part II.
- Since the accused in this case had knowledge of the likely result but no intention to kill, and since the death occurred days later due to infection, the offence was rightly categorized under Section 304 Part I IPC.
- The Hon’ble Court also noted that the death was not instant, showing that the injury was not meant to kill but still serious enough to risk death.
- The murder conviction (Section 302 IPC) was set aside, and the accused’s sentence under Section 304 Part I IPC was limited to the 14 years already served, which the Hon’ble Court found sufficient.
