SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(All) 3142

2010 (68) ACC 189
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
B.C. Kandpal, B.S. Verma, J.

State - Appellant
Versus
Fakir Chandra …Respondent
Government Appeal No. 304 of 2001
(Old No.296/1995)
Decided on : 10-09-2009

Important Points

The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, which provides an exception to criminal liability in cases of unsoundness of mind.

Subject

Criminal Law - Mental Illness and Criminal Liability

Act Referred

ARMS ACT : S.27, S.4, S.25
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.323, S.307, S.302, S.324, S.84

Headnote

Mental Illness - Criminal Liability - Section 307/302/324/323/27, 25/4 - The court discussed the application of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, which provides an exception to criminal liability in cases of unsoundness of mind. The judgment confirmed the acquittal of the accused, Fakir Chandra, based on the finding that he was suffering from a mental ailment at the time of the incident, and therefore, extended the benefit of exception under Section 84 IPC to the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The accused, Fakir Chandra, was charged under various sections including murder and attempted murder. The prosecution alleged that he killed his wives and injured police personnel. The accused claimed that he was falsely implicated and that the incident occurred due to a quarrel between his wives.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no material on record to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The witnesses did not support the prosecution's case, and it was established that the accused was suffering from a mental ailment at the time of the incident. Therefore, the court confirmed the acquittal of the accused.

Issues: The main issue was whether the accused was criminally liable for the incident, considering his mental ailment and the conflicting accounts of the witnesses.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, which provides an exception to criminal liability in cases of unsoundness of mind. It found that the accused's mental ailment at the time of the incident warranted the extension of the benefit of exception under Section 84 IPC.

Final Decision: The Government Appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal order of the accused was confirmed.

Advocates appeared:
Sri H.C. Pujari, A.G.A. for the State/appellant
Sri Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for respondent

JUDGMENT:

[B.C. Kandpal, ACJ. (Oral)]


This appeal, under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C., has been preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 25.10.1994 passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun, passed in Sessions Trial No. 42/1992, State vs. Fakir Chandra, under Sections 302/324/323/307 I.P.C. and Sessions Trial No. 20/1992, State vs. Fakir Chandra, under Section 27, 25/4 Arms Act, acquitting the accused respondent.


2. The prosecution case, in short, is that accused Fakir Chandra along with his wives Smt. Sheela and Smt. Savita and two children used to live at his residence 12, Race Course Road, Dehradun. On the date of incident in the morning in between 8.30 a.m. and 9.00 a.m. accused Fakir Chandra was doing marpeet with his wives and daughters. On hearing noise Chaman Lal Anand (PW-3), who is a neighbour of the accused, gave the information about the incident at Police Chowki Lakhi Bagh. On the information Tejveer Singh, Incharge Inspector, Police Chowki Lakhi Bagh along with police force reached the house of accused Fakir Chandra. Since information with regard to incident was also given to Police Control Room, some police personnel including Constable Vikesh Kumar (PW-12) reached over there. The said police personnel reached the house of accused Fakir Chandra at 9.20 a.m. and surrounded the house of the accused. Meanwhile, a fire was shot in the house of accused Fakir Chandra. At this S.I. Tejbeer Singh along with other police personnel asked the accused to open the door. When the accused did not open the door S.I. Tejbeer Singh knocked the door. In the meantime also accused fired with his double barrel gun from the window of the house and on account of this fire S.I. Tejbeer Singh (PW 14) and Constable Vikesh Kumar (PW 12) sustained injuries. S.I. Tejbeer Singh and Constable Vikesh Kumar were brought to Hospital by jeep of Control Room Police and the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Head Constable Mahavir Singh (PW 15). After receiving information of this incident Sri K.K. Gautam, Incharge Inspector Kotwali, Dehradun (PW 18), S.I. J.P. Juyal (PW 16) and S.I. Y.C. Sharma (PW 13) reached the place of incident. At that time also house of the accused Fakir Chandra was locked from inside. The said police personnel had challenged the accused to open the door of the house and when the accused did not open the door the police had thrown ball of tear gas by breaking the window, due to which there was fume in the house. At the same time, Minakshi Saini, elder daughter of accused Fakir Chandra, came out from the house and she stated that her father killed her both mothers. At the same time, accused Fakir Chandra also came out from the house having double barrel gun in his hand. The police arrested the accused with gun and on identification of accused himself recovered the Khukhri, by which accused assaulted at his both wives. The dead body of both the wives of accused, Smt. Sheela and Smt. Savita, were also recovered from the house. The two children of accused, who were hidden under the cot, were also came out from the house. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by S.I. Y.C. Sharma at P.S. Kotwali, Dehradun. The police made investigation in Case Crime No.669 under Section 307 I.P.C. S.I. K.K. Gautam, S.I. Dheerajpal Singh Malik, S.I. Jagveer Singh and S.I. Rajveer Singh Rawat investigated the matter in Case Crime No. 670 under Section 302 I.P.C. After completion of investigation the police submitted separate charge sheet in both the cases against the accused Fakir Chandra.


3. The respondent-accused was charged under Section 307 in Case Crime No. 669 and under Section 302 in Case Crime No. 670 by the trial court. The accused-respondent denied the charge and claimed the trial.


4. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the accused examined PW-1 Km. Minakshi, PW-2 Manish, PW-3 Chaman Lal Anand, PW-4 Pooran Chand, PW-5 Dr.R.C. Nautiyal, PW-6 Km. Charu, PW-7 Dr. R.P. Goyal, PW-8 Dr. B.C. Ramola, PW-9 La















































1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top