Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of offences affecting life
Section 302: Punishment for murder
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or [imprisonment for life], and shall also be liable to fine.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 302
-
Surender Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant could be convicted for an offence lesser than one punishable u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Govind Mandavi v. State of Chattisgarh
Whether the trial Court as well as the High Court committed grave errors in facts as well as in law while appreciating the evidence available on record and convicting the accused-appellant for the offences alleged…
-
The State of Jharkhand v. The Indian Builders Jamshedpur
Bharat Drilling & Foundation Treatment Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (2009) 16 SCC 705, if requires to be referred to a larger bench for reconsideration and authoritative decision in order to obviate…
-
Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Issue arose whether the courts below, in the attending facts and circumstances, justified in dismissing the application for summoning additional accused.
-
Tuhin Kumar Biswas @ Bumba v. The State of West Bengal
The Revision Petition filed by the Appellant-accused against the order dismissing the discharge application filed by the Appellant in FIR No.50/2020 dated 19.03.2020 lodged with police station Bidhannagar North, was…
-
Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi
Appellant-accused was convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC. The High Court further affirmed the order on sentence dated 20.02.2021, whereby the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for…
-
Govind v. State of Haryana
Whether the judgment of Trial Court, as affirmed by the High Court, convicting the appellant for the charges u/s.302, IPC and s.25, Arms Act and the sentence as directed, is based on cogent material and evidence…
-
State of Chhattisgarh v. Amit Aishwarya Jogi
Whether the three-Judge Bench judgment in the case of Lalu Prasad Yadav and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Anr. lays down the correct proposition of law, or whether the same requires reference to, and resolution by a larger…
-
Dashwanth v. State of Tamil Nadu
Trial Court found appellant guilty for the charges framed u/ss.302, 201, 363, 366 and 354-B of the IPC and s.8 r/w. s.7 and s.6 r/w. s.5(m) of the POCSO Act. An appeal against the said conviction was dismissed by the…
-
Nilesh Baburao Gitte v. State of Maharashtra
Appellant was convicted for matricide-killing of one’s own mother. By the present appeal, the appellant calls in question the correctness of the judgment of the High Court.
-
Rajendra Singh and Ors. v. State of Uttaranchal Etc.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court convicting the appellants u/s.302 IPC; and whether the appellants are the real persons who chased the deceased and killed him.
-
Zainul v. The State of Bihar
The High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellants herein and thereby affirmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 124 of 1989 holding the appellants herein…
-
Nazim & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
Whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, a complete chain of circumstances leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the Appellants, or whether the circumstances leave room for…
-
Nagamma @ Nagarathna & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka
In the instant case, whether the motive projected and the crime has been proved and whether the circumstances lead to the culpability of the accused.
-
Thammineni Bhaskar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 364 and 201 IPC for kidnapping and murder of the informant’s son.
-
Maniklal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court committed any error in bringing the case within the ambit of “attempt to commit murder” punishable u/s.307 IPC on the ground that the deceased-R died after a period of nine months from the date of…
-
Phireram v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned order, by which it disposed of the application filed by the appellant-complainant seeking cancellation of bail of the accused persons on the ground of threats being…
-
Rajan v. The State of Haryana
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302/34 IPC and ss.25, 27 of the Arms Act; and delay at the instance of…
-
Tarun Sharma v. State of Haryana.
Conviction of the appellant u/s.302, IPC based on the statement/ dying declaration (Exh. P-34) of the deceased, if ought to be set aside.
-
Putai v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants.
-
Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. Union of India & Ors.
Writ petition filed u/Art.32 challenging the continuing validity of the sentence of death against the petitioner, having been affirmed on appeal, declined in review, and followed by the rejection of mercy petitions and…
-
Neelam Kumari v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Whether the conviction and sentence of the appellant u/s.302, IPC for the murder of her infant son ought to be set aside.
-
Sd. Shabuddin v. The State of Telangana
Whether the judgment passed by the High Court places a reverse burden of proof upon the appellant and is thus, legally unsustainable; whether the conviction u/s.411, IPC for dishonestly receiving stolen property can be…
-
Irfan v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the Respondent No.2 holding that any further detention would be detrimental to his defence in the trial and inconsistent with the norms of fairness in criminal…
-
State of Karnataka v. Sri Darshan Etc.
Whether the order of the High Court granting bail to the respondents-accused persons in a case involving serious charges u/ss.302, 120B, and 34 IPC is perverse and legally unsustainable, warranting cancellation of bail.
-
Gurdeep Singh v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose whether the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences u/ss.307, 353, 332, 225, 186, and 120B IPC and s.25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the courts below was legally sustainable.
-
Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan and Another
In the instant appeal, the father of the prosecutrix challenges the order of the High Court. By the said order, the sentence imposed on respondent no.2 herein was suspended till the final disposal of the appeal. Whether…
-
Shanti Devi v. State of Haryana
Issue arose whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offences punishable u/ss.302/34 and 201/34 IPC for the alleged murder of the son of the informant.
-
Aasif @ Pasha v. The State of U.P. & Ors.
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which it declined to suspend the substantive order of sentence passed by the trial court against the appellant.
-
Shail Kumari v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the conviction, as recorded by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court was totally based on conjectures and surmises; whether the conviction of the appellant u/s.302 IPC is sustainable in law.
-
Kallu Nat Alias Mayank Kumar Nagar v. State of U.P. and Anr.
Whether the Court of Session, without itself recording evidence, can summon a person to stand trial in exercise of its powers u/s.193, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as an accused (along with others committed to it by…
-
Narayan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court erred in passing the impugned judgment relying on the confessional FIR filed by the appellant-accused himself and the medical evidence to uphold his conviction, however, altering it from s.302,…
-
Khem Singh (D) Through Lrs v. State of Uttaranchal (Now State of Uttarakhand) & Another Etc.
During pendency of these appeals, son of original appellant (since deceased) filed an application seeking setting aside of the abatement and for substitution. Whether the applicant is entitled to be substituted in place…
-
Ajwar v. Waseem and Another
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent no.1-accused.
-
Sukhdev Yadav @ Pehalwan v. State of (NCT of Delhi) & Others
Whether, an accused/convict who has completed his “life imprisonment for a fixed term” such as twenty years of actual sentence without remission, as in the instant case, is entitled to be released from prison on…
-
Sukdeb Saha v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Issue of growing crisis of student suicides in educational institutions; need for a preventive, remedial, and supportive framework for mental health protection and prevention of suicides by students; whether in the…
-
Esakkimuthu v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Whether the courts below erred in convicting the appellants and sentencing them to life imprisonment for the murder of the deceased relying upon the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2, who were interested witnesses being the…
-
Jai Prakash v. State of Uttarakhand
Allegation against the appellant herein that he committed a forceful rape and strangulated a 10 year old girl child. The punishment handed down to the appellant by the Courts below was of death penalty. Whether the…
-
Byluru Thippaiah @ Byaluru Thippaiah @ Nayakara Thippaiah v. State of Karnataka
Issue arose as regards commutation of the death sentence awarded to the appellant for committing brutal murder of his wife, sister-in-law and his three children.
-
Shiv Baran v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court quashing the summons issued against respondent u/s.319 CrPC by the trial court.
-
Baljinder Kumar @ Kala v. State of Punjab
Whether the courts below erred in convicting the appellant for offences u/ss.302, 308 and 325, Penal Code, 1860 and imposing death sentence on him, when the prosecution had failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable…
-
L. Muruganantham v. State of Tamil Nadu & Others
(A) Whether the order of the High Court enhancing compensation to Rs.5,00,000/- for the alleged violations committed against the appellant, while dismissing the complaint against respondent no.3, and partly allowing the…
-
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamilnadu
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302, 376 and 397 IPC.
-
Kum. Shubha @ Shubhashankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conviction of the appellants by the High Court u/s.302 read with s.120-B, IPC and additionally, s.201, IPC for A-4 alone, is justified.
-
Rahil & Anr. v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
Whether the High Court erred in reversing the acquittal passed by the trial court and convicting the appellants for offence u/s.302, Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing them to life imprisonment.
-
Vaibhav v. The State of Maharashtra
In a case based on circumstantial evidence where there were missing links in the chain of circumstances, whether the finding of the High Court regarding the conviction of the appellant for offences u/ss.302, 201 r/w…
-
Chetan v. The State of Karnataka
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 304 IPC, and u/ss.3, 5 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
Padman Bibhar v. State of Odisha
Whether appellant can be convicted only on the basis of evidence on ‘last seen together’.
-
Baljinder Singh Alias Aman v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the respondents-accused(s) setting aside the order of the Trial Court by which it declined to grant bail.
-
Nagarajan & Anr. v. The State of Tamil Nadu
Whether the benefit of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 can be granted to the appellants; if the answer to the aforesaid issue is in the negative, can the reduced sentence that the Food Safety and…
-
Waris v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether Trial Court ought to have given proper time and opportunity to the legal aid defence counsel to prepare the matter and should have deferred the cross-examination of PW-1 by a reasonable time so as to ensure…
-
Ramkirat Munilal Goud v. State of Maharashtra Etc.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for causing rape and murder of a child aged 3 years and 9 months.
-
Mohammed Asarudeen v. Union of India & Ors.
Whether the Special Court while dealing with an application under sub-section 2 of s.44 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 made in respect of a large number of witnesses, recorded the satifaction which is…
-
Gayatri Balasamy v. M/s ISG Novasoft Technologies Limited
In ‡M. Hakeem and Anr.’s case, this Court held that while exercising powers u/s.34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a Court hearing the petition had no power to “modify” the Award, whereas other benches of…
-
Chunni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the accused at the time of commission of crime was incapable of making conscious and informed decision or was suffering from certain mental incapacity or unsoundness of mind; Whether a benefit of doubt may be…
-
K.P. Tamilmaran v. The State by Deputy Superintendent of Police
Whether the High Court was justified in upholding the conviction and sentence of A-15 under Sections 217, 218, Penal Code, 1860 and ss.3(2)(i), 4, SC/ST Act, 1989 and modifying the conviction and sentence of A-14, while…
-
Ramyash @ Lal Bahadur v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Etc. Etc
Whether the High Court erred in allowing the Correction Application filed under Section 362, CrPC by the accused persons and modifying its earlier judgment by converting the conviction under Section 302 to Section 304…
-
Ramachandraiah & Anr. v. M. Manjula & Ors.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court was justified in directing for investigation by the CBI.
-
Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which the accused was acquitted of the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC.
-
Sachin v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether, the High Court could enhance the sentence under its revisional powers in a convict’s appeal against conviction.
-
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Raj Kumar Arora & Ors.
Issue arose whether an offence u/s.8(c) of the NDPS Act could be said to have been made out when an accused “deals with” psychotropic substances mentioned in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but not figuring in Schedule I…
-
Subhash Aggarwal v. The State of NCT of Delhi
Filicide or suicide is the vexing question in the instant case where a father was tried and convicted u/s.302 of the Penal Code, 1860 r/w. s.25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
-
Akhilesh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the trial court’s summoning order.
-
Aslam alias Imran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting the accused-appellant u/s.302 IPC.
-
Sudam Prabhakar Achat v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose as to whether the conviction u/s.302 IPC could be converted into s.304 Part I or Part II IPC.
-
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Shyamlal & Ors.
The High Court converted the conviction of respondents u/s.302 of IPC into the second part of s.304 of the IPC. Whether the judgment of the High Court requires interference.
-
Jamin & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
(i) Whether the High Court was right in exercising its revisional jurisdiction for the purpose of setting aside the order of the Trial Court rejecting the second application preferred by the respondent no.2 u/s.319 of…
-
Karandeep Sharma @ Razia @ Raju v. State of Uttarakhand
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant-accused for the kidnapping, rape/sexual assault and murder of a minor is sustainable.
-
Suresh v. State Rep. By Inspector of Police
Whether the High Court was correct to uphold the conviction and life imprisonment granted by the Trial Court.
-
Sudershan Singh Wazir v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of orders passed by the High Court staying the discharge of the accused and directing him to surrender before the trial court.
-
Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
Whether it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the alleged crime by producing credible and legally admissible evidence to punish.
-
The State of Chattisgarh v. Ashok Bhoi Etc.
Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the criminal appeal preferred by accused-respondent and dismissing acquittal appeal preferred by the State, thereby acquitting both the accused persons.
-
Md. Bani Alam Mazid @ Dhan v. State of Assam
In a case where the appellant alongwith a co-accused was alleged to have kidnapped and murdered the minor daughter of PW1, the issues for consideration were: (i) Whether the chain of circumstantial evidence based on…
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh
Does the Evidence Act, 1872 prescribe any particular age as a determinative factor to treat a witness to be a competent witness; Does the Evidence Act treat evidence of a child on the same footing as any other witness;…
-
Jitender @ Kalla v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
I. Whether the Supreme Court decisions in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (I) and (II), which lay down the guidelines for the designation of senior advocates, require reconsideration. II. Whether an advocate on…
-
Ramesh A. Naika v. The Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka Etc.
Appellant-R, a bank manager, was convicted of murdering his two minor children, along with his sister-in-law and mother-in-law, in June 2010. His motive stemmed from disapproval of his sister-in-law’s relationship,…
-
Hansraj v. State of Chhattisgarh
The appellant was convicted for offence u/s.302 IPC. Whether the appellant can be held guilty of the commission of offence beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Raja Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the prosecution failed to prove the chain of circumstances leading to the guilt of the appellant-accused, beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Ayyub & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order of High Court declining to quash the proceedings against the appellants u/s.306, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Sanjay v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Appellant/accused was convicted under Section 302 IPC and 376(2)(G) IPC for alleged murder of a four-year-old girl. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant and sentenced him to death, which was later confirmed by…
-
Sovaran Singh Prajapati v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
a. Whether the Trial Court followed the basic requirements of a fairly conducted trial, in accordance with well-established prepositions of law, before imposing death sentence upon the Appellant/Accused? b. Whether the…
-
Ramu Appa Mahapatar v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether on the strength of the evidence of the four witnesses, the appellant-accused can be linked with the offence; whether it can be said that the charge against the accused of committing murder of the deceased stood…
-
Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc.
Whether the High Court committed any error in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Jasminbhai Bharatbhai Kothari v. State of Gujarat
Plain reading and interpretation of Order XXII Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
-
Mahabir & Ors. v. State of Haryana
Whether the High Court committed any error in passing the impugned judgment and order of conviction in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction u/s.401 r/w. s.397 of the CrPC; Whether Proviso to s.372 of CrPC creates a…
-
Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. The State of Maharashtra
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for rape and murder of the deceased and imposition of death sentence.
-
Gambhir Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the sustainability of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of conviction and death sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial court.
-
Constable 907 Surendra Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttarakhand
Matter pertains to the correctness of the judgment of the High Court setting aside the acquittal by trial court and convicting the appellants u/s.302/34 IPC.
-
Nimai Ghosh & Ors. v. The State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
The instant criminal appeal assails the findings recorded by the High Court, thereby convicting the appellants herein u/s.302/34 of IPC and s.27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Whether the findings recorded by the High Court in…
-
Thammaraya and Another v. The State of Karnataka
Whether the conviction of the appellants-accused under Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34, Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable.
-
The State of Jharkhand & Others v. Vikash Tiwary @ Bikash Tiwary @ Bikash Nath
Whether the High Court was correct in quashing the order/ memo dated 17.05.2023 issued by the Inspector General of Prisons, Ranchi, Jharkhand, making intra-State transfer of the respondent herein from Lok Nayak Jai…
-
Goverdhan & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh
The two accused-appellants and their father-the third accused, were convicted by the trial court u/s.302 r/w s.34 IPC for assaulting a person with deadly weapons causing his death. High Court upheld the conviction of…
-
Sadashiv Dhondiram Patil v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether Village Police Patil is a Police Officer in terms of s. 25 of the Evidence Act; and whether the High Court erred in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Abdul Nassar v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed…
-
Omi @ Omkar Rathore & Anr. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards summoning a person as accused for facing the trial, when the said person was named in the FIR but not chargesheeted.
-
Daljit Singh v. State of Haryana & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the order passed by the High Court refusing to quash the complaint, summoning order and order declaring the appellant a proclaimed offender passed by the Magistrate; whether the proclaimed…
-
Shambhu Debnath v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Whether the High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail to accused persons despite specific allegations of heinous crime u/s.302 of Penal Code, 1860 and chargesheet on record that established the allegations made…
-
P. Manikandan v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.
Whether the High Court was justified in directing re-investigation and retrial of the same offence on the same set of facts, after acquitting the accused by giving him the benefit of doubt; Whether, in the attending…
-
Kunhimuhammed@Kunheethu v. The State of Kerala
Whether appellant had the intention to commit murder; whether the appellant’s act can be brought under section 304, IPC in light of the offence being committed in exercise of private defense and thereby exceeding the…
-
Ashok v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order of conviction and sentence against the appellant, for the offences punishable u/ss.376, 302, 201 IPC as also SC and ST Act 1989; and as regards the role of the Public…