Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | Assault and murder Right of private defence |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Dismissed |
Headnote | Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 96 to 106, 302, 309 and 341:Assault and murder - Right of private defence - Accused A1, A2 and A3 allegedly attacking deceased at the instigation of their mother, accused A4 - Deceased succumbed to the injuries - Trial Court found all the accused guilty of committing the offences u/Ss. 302 and 341 IPC and A4, in addition, for committing the offence u/s. 309 IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment - Upholding the conviction of accused A1, A2 and A3, High Court directed acquittal of A4 - On appeal, Held: Number of injuries not always a safe criterion for determining who the aggressor was - Non-explanation of injuries sustained by accused at the time of occurrence/in the course of altercation is an important circumstance, but mere non-explanation of injuries by the prosecution may not affect the case of the prosecution when the injuries sustained by the accused are minor and evidence clear and cogent - A plea of right of private defence cannot be based on surmises and speculations - In order to find whether such right is available or not, entire incident must be examined with care and viewed in its proper setting - To claim the right of private defence the accused must show the existence of circumstances giving rise to reasonable grounds for apprehending death or grievous hurt - The right lasts so long as reasonable apprehension of the danger to the body continues - Merely because accused persons sustained injuries, that does not confer such right to the extent of causing death as in the present case - No cogent and credible evidence adduced by the accused to establish that they were under grave apprehension about safety of their lives and property that retaliation to the extent of causing death of the deceased was absolutely necessary - Hence, appeal dismissed on merit.According to the prosecution, there was enmity between the families of the deceased and the accused persons as wife of the deceased started living with accused, A1 by deserting her husband and child. The deceased and his child were living only with PW.1, the informant. On the fateful day, accused persons, A1 to A3, at the instance of their mother, A4 attacked the deceased fatally, resulting in his death. PW1 raised an alarm, all the accused made good their escape with the weapons of offences in their hands. Informant took the deceased to the Government Hospital, where he was declared dead. A complaint was lodged by her in the Police Station. The bloodstained apparels of the deceased were recovered by the Police. The deceased stated before the Causality Medical Officer in the Government Headquarters Hospital that injuries have been sustained by him at the hands of three known persons. On the same day, A1 also appeared before the Medical Officer and stated that the injuries have also been sustained by him at the hands of a known person. After completion of the investigation, charges were framed against the accused persons. Trial Court, relying on the evidence of PW 1, found all the four accused persons guilty and found A1 to A3 guilty for committing the offences punishable u/Ss. 302 and 341 and A4 for committing the offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w Section 34 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. An appeal was preferred by the accused persons before the High Court. The High Court upheld the conviction of accused A1, A2 and A3 while discarding the right of private defence but directing acquittal of co-accused, A4. Hence the present appeal filed by the convicts.Accused-appellant contended that the prosecution version is unbelievable; that the presence of PW1 at the place of occurrence is highly doubtful; that when the evidence has been discarded in respect of A4, conviction could not have been maintained against A1 to A3, the present appellants; and that the aspect of right of private defence has not been properly considered by the High Court. |
Judge | Hon'ble Dr. Justice Arijit Pasayat |
Neutral Citation | 2007 INSC 847 |
Petitioner | Jesu Asir Singh And Ors. |
Respondent | State Through Inspector Of Police |
SCR | [2007] 9 S.C.R. 92 |
Judgement Date | 2007-08-20 |
Case Number | 1090 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |