SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Raj) 531

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Kanta Bhatnagar, Jas Raj Chopra, JJ.
Ram Lal - Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Cr. Appeal No. 159 of 1980.
Decided On : 19-07-1985

In cases of self-defense, the extent of force used must be proportionate to the threat posed, and exceeding the necessary force may result in a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - ALTERED TO SECTION 304 PART I IPC - EXCEEDING RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE - SENTENCE REDUCED.

Fact of the Case:

Appellant Ramlal was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for causing fatal head injuries to Bhagirath with a Dharia. Ramlal claimed self-defense, stating that Bhagirath attacked him first and he acted to protect himself.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the origin of the quarrel and that there was evidence suggesting that Ramlal sustained injuries before inflicting the fatal blow on Bhagirath. The court concluded that Ramlal acted in self-defense but exceeded the necessary force, resulting in Bhagirath's death.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved the origin of the quarrel and the circumstances leading to the fatal incident. 2. Whether the appellant's claim of self-defense was valid and proportionate to the threat posed. 3. Whether the appellant's conviction under Section 302 IPC was appropriate or should be altered.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution failed to provide a clear account of the events leading to the incident, leaving doubt as to who initiated the altercation. 2. The court recognized the appellant's right to self-defense but found that the extent of the injuries inflicted on Bhagirath exceeded what was necessary to protect himself. 3. The court concluded that the appellant's actions fell within the ambit of exceeding the right of private defense, warranting a conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.

Final Decision: The court altered the appellant's conviction from Section 302 IPC (murder) to Section 304 Part I IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and reduced his sentence from life imprisonment to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200.

JUDGMENT

1. - Appellant Ram lal was tried for the offence under s. 302, IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Pali. By the judgment dated February 29, 1980, the learned Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty for the offence under s. 302 IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for life. Feeling dis-satisfied by his conviction and sentence, the appellant Ramlal has preferred this appeal in this Court.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case giving rise to the trial and conviction of the appellant are as under:

3. On November 25, 1978, at about 4.30 P.M. PW 4 Hariram lodged the First Information Report at Police Station Looni to the effect that his nephew Bhagirath has been injured by Ramlal. A case under s. 302 IPC was registered. PW II Laxminarain, the Station House Officer, Looni, went to the site and proceeded with the necessary investigation. The site inspection plan were prepared. Postmortem examination of deceased Bhagirath was conducted by PW 2 Dr. N.S. Kothari, Medical Juriste, Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur. PW 2 Dr. N.S. Kothari prepared the postmortem examination report (Ex. P. 2). The Doctor noted the following injuries on the dead body of Bhagirath

"(1) Incised stitched wound 23.0 cm. long on the left fronto-parietal occipital region of the scalp (torn) long tordinal direction slightly curved 7.5 cm. above the superior aspect of the left ear pinna 40 cm. above and lateral to the left eye brow with cophatohaemetoma on removing the stiches the wounds margins are clean out with cutting of under lying bones i.e. left frontal, parietal and left occipital bones. The membrances covering the brain are out with clean cut margin underlying the wound. There is cut in the left hemisphere of the brain in the parietal region with intra cranial haemorrhage. All the tissue underneath the wound is clearly divided in ending bones and membrances of the brain."
In the opinion of the Doctor, the cause of death was comma as a result of head injury.

4. Appellant Ramlal also reached that police station 5.45 P.M. on the same day i.e. 25-11-1978 and informed the SRO about his being given a beating by Bhagirath. The SHO had already information regarding the Bhagirath and his injuries. He, therefore, arrested the accused. After his arrest, while in custody, appellant Ramlal furnished information for getting recovered Dhariya from his field. The SHO in pursuance of the information, recovered the Dharia from the field of the appellant. Articles suspected to be stained with blood recovered during the course of investigation were sent to the Chemical Analyser for chemical analysis. On November 27, 1978, at about 6 A.M. injured Bhagirath succumbed to the injuries sustained by him. The case initially registered under section 307 IPC was converted to one under section 302 IPC. The reports of the Chemical Analyser and the Serologist were received. The Serologist detected human blood on the clothes of the deceased and the accused. The origin of the blood on the Dhariya could not be known. After completion of the necessary investigation, charge sheet against the appellant and his mother Smt. Gavari against whom there was allegation of instigating the appellant for committing the crime was filed in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali. The learned Magistrate finding it a case exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, committed the appellant to the Court of Sessions Judge, Pali to stand their trial.

5. Before framing of the charge Smt. Gavari expired and the case proceeded against the appellant only. The learned Sessions Judge Pali charge-sheeted the appellant for the offence under section 302 IPC and recorded his plea. He denied the charge and claimed to be tried. In order to substantiate its case prosecution examined 15 witnesses in all The appellant in his statement under section 313 Cr. PC took the plea that when he was grazing cows in the field of Haste Sargara. Bhagirath deceased went there and started beating on the pretext he had giv


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top