Jabalpur: A man serving a life sentence for killing his wife got his term reduced to seven years rigorous imprisonment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court after telling the judges about the victim’s “a thousand husbands” remark.
Shiva Kahar killed his wife, Kiran, who was then seven-months pregnant, on September 18, 2021, after an argument at their home in Chhindwara district’s Chaurai block.
According to the prosecution, Kiran was struck on the head with a stone, resulting in her death. After the incident, Kahar allegedly informed both his father-in-law and the local police station about what had happened, after which he was arrested.
Kahar stated during investigation that an argument had broken out between the couple on the day of the incident. He claimed that during the quarrel, Kiran told him, “I will have a thousand husbands like you”, PTI reported.
He apparently got enraged at this statement, picked up a stone lying nearby and hit Kiran on the head, leading to her death.
A district court in Chhindwara had convicted Kahar and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He later challenged the verdict before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The High Court examined the circums
tances surrounding the incident and concluded that the killing did not appear to have been planned in advance. While reducing the sentence, the Court observed that the crime was committed under “sudden and grave provocation” and was not a premeditated act.
The division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh said: “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that it was not a pre-meditated offence, the stone lying nearby was used to cause injury to Kiran which resulted in her death; and after the incident, he (accused) himself informed the incident to the police and relatives of the Kiran.”
The Court also addressed the significance of the remark allegedly made during the argument.
“When a wife refers to her husband that ‘she can keep thousand husbands like him’ it is indirect/oblique reference to worthlessness of the husband, meaning he has no value as a human being or a husband. Therefore, it can be turned as a sudden and grave provocation,” the bench said.
The statement amounted to an indirect suggestion that the husband was of little worth, which the judges considered sufficient provocation in the circumstances of the case, as reported by Hindustan Times.
The Court reviewed the facts and held that the case did not fall under Section 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code but under Section 304 Part-II, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder where death is caused with the knowledge that the act is likely to result in death, but without an intention to kill.
“Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, while maintaining the conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, we find that case would not fall under 304 Part-I of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) but would fall under Section 304 Part-II of IPC,” the Court said.