JANGIR SINGH v. THE STATE OF PUNJAB
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 31 Oct 2018
- Bench
- N V RAMANA, MOHAN M SHANTANAGOUDAR
Outcome
Disposed of
Thus, the appeal stands disposed of, accordingly
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 100, 300, 302, 304(1)
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 313, 379
Judgment
in the presence of other colleagues. Both the deceased and the appellant–accused were altercating face-to-face and standing at a distance of 10 feet from each other. This shows that they could see the facial expressions of each other clearly and comprehend the apprehending circumstances accordingly. Taking note of the fact that owing to the imminent danger perceived by the appellant from the aiming of rifle at him by the deceased, he fired at the deceased and killed him. This comes within the ambit of right to private defence, however, it clearly traverses beyond the legitimate exercise of the same. The appellant–accused chose to shoot on a vital part of the body i.e., chest to safeguard himself from the imminent threat. However, the accused could have avoided the vital part of the deceased. But absence of good faith is not found in exercise of right of private defence. However, having regard to the situs of the injury (i.e. the chest of the deceased), it is clear that the accused has exceeded the power given to him in law and has caused the death of the deceased against whom he exercised right of private defence without premeditation. In cases of disproportionate harm leading to death of the aggressor, sentence under Section 304 Part I is the appropriate sentence. Thus, offence committed by the accused– appellant will fall under Section 304 Part I IPC. [Para 12, 13] [737-D-H; 738-A-B]
1.3 Taking into consideration all the material facts, the conviction under Section 302 IPC passed by the High Court is set aside and the same is converted to Section 304 Part–I IPC. [Para 17]739-C-D]
1.4 The appellant has undergone 10 years of actual imprisonment which amounts to 18 years of imprisonment as per the concerned State Jail Manual. As the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence committed under Section 304 Part I, IPC is 10 years and the appellant is stated to have already undergone 10 years of actual imprisonment. The appellant is directed to be released forthwith. [Para 18][739-D-E]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Thus, the appeal stands disposed of, accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 100, 300, 302, 304(1); Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 313, 379.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Supreme Court of India, on 31 Oct 2018. The bench was N V RAMANA, MOHAN M SHANTANAGOUDAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.