Supreme Court sets aside life imprisonment in murder case on grounds of insanity
The Supreme Court set aside the life imprisonment of a man in a case of murder on the ground that there is 'reasonable doubt' that he committed the crime in a fit of insanity.
The Court dismissed the Chhattisgarh Police's argument that a medical examination on the man had found him normal.
However, a Bench of Justice A.S. Oka, who retired on May 24, said the medical check on the man, Dashrath Patra, was conducted five years after the crime, and thus 'meaningless'.
The trial court had sentenced Patra to life imprisonment for bludgeoning a man to death in 2018. The State High Court had confirmed the punishment.
The top court order said the onus of proving a defence of insanity lay on the accused.
'The burden to prove legal insanity is on the accused. It is enough if a reasonable doubt is created about the mental state of the accused at the time of the commission of the offence. The standard of proof to prove insanity is only a reasonable doubt,' the Court observed in the recent order.
The Court, in its order, referred to judicial precedents which settle the law on the defence of insanity. 'Even if the accused was not able to establish conclusively that he was insane at the time he committed the offence, if the evidence placed before the Court raise a reasonable doubt about the ingredients of the offence, including mens rea [intention] of the accused, the Court would be entitled to acquit the accused,' the Bench quoted from past decisions.
In the current case, the top court found witness testimonies that Patra suffered from bouts of insanity.
Under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, a person is exonerated on the ground of unsoundness of mind if he, at the time of doing the act, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that it is contrary to law.
'The law lays down that no act done by a lunatic is an offence. The reason is that a lunatic is not in a position to defend himself. The right to defend a charge is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution,' the Court noted.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Anticipatory bail must not be given mechanically: SC
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Supreme Court has said anticipatory bail in cases involving serious offences should not be given in a mechanical manner.A three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta made the observation while setting aside an order of anticipatory bail to four accused in a murder case "The order of the High Court (Patna) does not disclose any reasoning for granting anticipatory bail in a matter involving serious offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC," the bench said in its May 1 continued, "The impugned order is cryptic and lacking in judicial analysis. In cases involving serious offences, the grant of anticipatory bail in such a mechanical manner cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside."On a plain reading of the FIR and accompanying material, the court noted that the appellant's father was assaulted and killed in the presence of the appellant, who was also the informant."The incident appears to have stemmed from a dispute regarding obstruction of a pathway. The specific roles attributed to the accused, as stated in the FIR, indicate that they participated in the assault even after the deceased had collapsed," the top court high court, it said, "clearly failed" to appreciate the gravity and nature of the allegations in the accused persons was, as a result, directed to surrender within eight order came on a plea filed by the son of the victim, challenging the order granting them anticipatory victim was assaulted in 2023 with an iron rod and sticks during a dispute between a result of the head injury, he succumbed to injuries the same day and an FIR was registered on the basis of the appellant's statement against seven accused persons.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Anticipatory bail in serious offences must not be given mechanically: SC
The Supreme Court has said anticipatory bail in cases involving serious offences should not be given in a mechanical manner. A three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta made the observation while setting aside an order of anticipatory bail to four accused in a murder case. "The order of the High Court (Patna) does not disclose any reasoning for granting anticipatory bail in a matter involving serious offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC," the bench said in its May 1 order. It continued, "The impugned order is cryptic and lacking in judicial analysis. In cases involving serious offences, the grant of anticipatory bail in such a mechanical manner cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside." On a plain reading of the FIR and accompanying material, the court noted that the appellant's father was assaulted and killed in the presence of the appellant, who was also the informant. "The incident appears to have stemmed from a dispute regarding obstruction of a pathway. The specific roles attributed to the accused, as stated in the FIR, indicate that they participated in the assault even after the deceased had collapsed," the top court said. The high court, it said, "clearly failed" to appreciate the gravity and nature of the allegations in the case. The accused persons was, as a result, directed to surrender within eight weeks. The order came on a plea filed by the son of the victim, challenging the order granting them anticipatory bail. The victim was assaulted in 2023 with an iron rod and sticks during a dispute between neighbours. As a result of the head injury, he succumbed to injuries the same day and an FIR was registered on the basis of the appellant's statement against seven accused persons. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Anticipatory bail must not be given mechanically: SC
New Delhi, The Supreme Court has said anticipatory bail in cases involving serious offences should not be given in a mechanical manner. A three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta made the observation while setting aside an order of anticipatory bail to four accused in a murder case. "The order of the High Court does not disclose any reasoning for granting anticipatory bail in a matter involving serious offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC," the bench said in its May 1 order. It continued, "The impugned order is cryptic and lacking in judicial analysis. In cases involving serious offences, the grant of anticipatory bail in such a mechanical manner cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside." On a plain reading of the FIR and accompanying material, the court noted that the appellant's father was assaulted and killed in the presence of the appellant, who was also the informant. "The incident appears to have stemmed from a dispute regarding obstruction of a pathway. The specific roles attributed to the accused, as stated in the FIR, indicate that they participated in the assault even after the deceased had collapsed," the top court said. The high court, it said, "clearly failed" to appreciate the gravity and nature of the allegations in the case. The accused persons was, as a result, directed to surrender within eight weeks. The order came on a plea filed by the son of the victim, challenging the order granting them anticipatory bail. The victim was assaulted in 2023 with an iron rod and sticks during a dispute between neighbours. As a result of the head injury, he succumbed to injuries the same day and an FIR was registered on the basis of the appellant's statement against seven accused persons.
