Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD, BISWAJIT PALIT
Sessions Judge, Khowai District – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J.—The appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. and reference under Section 366 of Cr.P.C. arise out of common Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence dated 23.11.2022 passed in connection with ST(T-1)09 of 2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai, Tripura whereby the learned Court below convicted the appellant for the commission of offence under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, i.e. to suffer S.I. for 2 months and convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to death as per law. Learned Court below also passed an order to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- each to the victims namely Smt. Mina Paul(Debroy) wife of the Convict and Karnabir Das. The conviction and sentence are challenged by the accused. In view of capital punishment, a reference for confirmation of the death penalty is also placed for our consideration.
2. The brief fact of this case is that on 26.11.2021 at about 11.00 p.m. the brother of the informant namely, Sri Pradip Debroy went to sleep after dinner. After that all of a sudden, the informant and other inmates of the house including his elder brother Amalesh Debroy he
Murder and attempt to murder – It cannot be said that that crime committed without any motive is not a crime and accused is entitled to acquittal.
The court held that in absence of established motive and mens rea, coupled with issues of mental health, capital punishment should be substituted with life imprisonment, emphasizing that death senten....
The duty of the Investigating Officer to subject the accused to immediate medical examination and place the evidence before the court in cases of suspected mental illness, and the importance of provi....
An accused can be exonerated if not aware of wrongfulness due to unsoundness of mind, requiring examination of circumstantial behavior surrounding the crime.
The court established that mental incapacity due to illness absolves an individual from criminal responsibility under IPC Section 84.
The court established that the conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder is justified when intent to kill is not proven, relying on witness credibility and evidential discrepancies.
The burden of proof for a defense of insanity under IPC Section 84 lies with the accused, and sufficient evidence must demonstrate unsoundness of mind at the time of the offense.
The burden of proving insanity lies with the defense, and every minor mental aberration does not constitute legal insanity.
The appeal highlighted that an accused can be absolved of criminal liability if proven to be unsound of mind at the time of offense, adhering to S. 84 IPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
