Witchcraft Death: Chhattisgarh High Court Alters Conviction Of Man Accused Of Killing Aunt From Murder To Culpable Homicide

The Chhattisgarh High Court has altered the order of conviction and sentence handed down to a man for killing his aunt suspecting her to be practising ‘witchcraft’.

While altering conviction for murder into one for culpable homicide, the Division Bench of Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal and Justice Radhakishan Agrawal observed,

“Considering the nature of injury, there was no intention to cause death but the appellant must have had knowledge that the injury caused by him to deceased is likely to cause death and the appellant had not taken any undue advantage and has not acted in unusual manner; as such, the case of the appellant would fall under Exception 4 to Section 300 of I.P.C.”

The prosecution alleged that one of the acquitted co-accused, the deceased’s husband and the wife of appellant fell ill, for which the appellant suspected that the deceased has played witchcraft. Therefore, dispute arose between the deceased and appellant and the appellant assaulted the deceased by sharp edged weapons, for which she suffered grievous injuries and died.

After investigation, five accused persons were charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offence, but only the appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Tonhi Pratadna Adhiniyam and the other four accused persons were acquitted of the charges. Being aggrieved by such order of the trial Court, the appellant approached the High Court.

Court’s Observations

Considering the fact that the weapon of offence was seized as per the disclosure statement made by the appellant and also taking into account the trace of blood of same group on the weapon and on the clothes of the deceased, the Court was of the view that the prosecution has established that the deceased succumbed due to the injuries caused to her by the appellant.

The next question which fell for consideration was whether the aforesaid act would constitute murder punishable under Section 302 or culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under Section 304 of the IPC.

The Court cited a number of decisions of the Supreme Court which elaborated the criteria which necessitate alteration of the conviction for murder into one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

The Court relied on Arjun v. State of Chhattisgarh, wherein the Supreme Court held that if there is intent and knowledge, the same would be case of Section 304 Part-I IPC and if it is only a case of knowledge and not the intention to cause murder and bodily injury, then same would be a case of Section 304 Part-II IPC.

The Court noted that the village, where both the deceased and appellant were residing, was a backward area and they belonged to under-developed community, most of them are illiterate and believe in superstitions. Against this backdrop, the Court observed,

“It is a common phenomena in the community dominated areas that they practice magic and many other type of witchcrafts to achieve their object whether good or bad. They hold many superstitions responsible for any misfortune and mis-happenings in their life and sometimes they became revengeful for no other reason but for their own doubts that someone is playing witchcrafts on them or something wrong had been happened in their family or life due to witchcrafts played by someone.”

The Court, thus, held that there was no premeditation on the part of the appellant to cause death of the deceased. The appellant was suspecting that his wife was suffering serious ailment due to witchcraft played by the deceased and he had developed an anger, due to which he assaulted the deceased.

Accordingly, having regard for the aforesaid facts and law, the Court held,

“Considering the nature of injury, there was no intention to cause death but the appellant must have had knowledge that the injury caused by him to deceased is likely to cause death and the appellant had not taken any undue advantage and has not acted in unusual manner; as such, the case of the appellant would fall under Exception 4 to Section 300 of I.P.C.”

Resultantly, the appellant was sentenced to the period already undergone, as he was in jail for more than 9 years.

Case Title: Madan Lal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case No: Criminal Appeal No. 400 of 2015

Date of Judgment: July 17, 2023

Counsel for the Appellant: Mrs. Indira Tripathi, Advocate

Counsel for the State: Mr. Sudeep Verma, Deputy Govt. Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment