In a significant ruling on Friday, the Supreme Court dismissed the plea of a 20-year-old man from Karnataka seeking a further reduction of his prison term. The appellant, Kotresh alias Kotrappa, had been convicted for killing a bystander during a violent family altercation. The bench, comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih, upheld the Karnataka High Court’s decision to impose eight years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
Background
The case had its roots in a grim family conflict. Kotresh’s cousin had allegedly been raped by one ‘V’, the elder brother of the deceased, ‘S’. After the assault, she gave birth to a child. The two families were at odds over whether V should marry the victim to “restore family honour.” Talks between them had failed a day before the tragic incident.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Quashes ED's ₹227 Crore Attachment Against Prakash Industries, Says Coal
On the following day, tempers flared again. The appellant and his relatives went to V’s house, where a heated argument quickly turned into a scuffle. S, who was not involved in the quarrel, stepped in to calm both sides. In a sudden fit of rage, Kotresh grabbed an axe from a nearby house and struck S on the neck. The blow proved fatal.
Court’s Observations
The apex court took a stern view of the incident. Justice Datta remarked that although the appellant might have been emotionally affected by his cousin’s plight, there was “no sudden provocation at the place of occurrence which necessitated him to act in the manner he did.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Forms High-Level Panel to Frame National Transgender Employment Policy, Orders
The Court noted that S was merely trying to mediate peace and bore no responsibility for the earlier wrongs. Calling S an innocent victim, the bench said the accused acted “without any justification.”
Senior advocate Rahul Kaushik, appearing for the appellant, argued that the act was not premeditated and that the young man had already spent over two and a half years in custody. He urged the Court to consider leniency, citing earlier cases where sentences under similar circumstances had been reduced.
However, amicus curiae Ashok Gaur opposed the plea, insisting the act was deliberate. He pointed out that Kotresh knew exactly where the axe was kept, which, he argued, showed premeditation. “This was not an act of heat or impulse,” he contended, adding that S’s death could have been avoided entirely.
The bench quoted from its earlier ruling in Raj Bala v. State of Haryana (2016), reminding that “a court, while imposing sentence, must respond to the collective cry of society” and that leniency should not undermine justice.
Read also:- Supreme Court Acquits Four Men in 35-Year-Old Madhya Pradesh Murder Case, Citing Contradictions
Decision
After reviewing the evidence and precedents, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, finding “no ground for further reduction.” The bench ruled:
“The sentence imposed by the High Court does not call for any interference. The appellant is not entitled to any relief.”
However, the Court clarified that Kotresh could still seek premature release under Karnataka’s remission policy once eligible.
Before closing the matter, Justice Datta acknowledged the assistance of the amici curiae, Mr. Ashok Gaur and Ms. Shakshi Singh, who had represented the complainant.
With that, the appeal stood dismissed.
Case: Kotresh @ Kotrappa vs State of Karnataka & Anr (2025)
Citation: 2025 INSC 1250
Case Type: Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 16833 of 2024)
Date of Judgment: October 17, 2025
