Citations: Gopal and Ors. Vs The State of Rajasthan, AIR 1972 SC 1838
Date of Judgement: 08/02/1972
Equivalent citations: 1972 CriLJ 1191, (1972) 3 SCC 486, 1972 (4) UJ 721 SC, 1972 WLN 131
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 1969
Case Type: Criminal Appeal
Petitioner: Gopal and Ors.
Respondent: The State of Rajasthan
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A Grover, A Ray, D Palekar, M Beg
Court: Supreme Court of India
Statutes Referred:
- Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section – 34, 147, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324, 449
Facts:
- In instant case five persons were tried by the Sessions Judges on charges under Sections 147, 499, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code,1860.
- According to the prosecution When Appellant (Dhanpat) arrived at Adram’s house in a state of Kication. Adram, Sohanlal, and Kashi-ram were sitting there. He was joined by Gopal, who wielded a Barehha, and Dhonkel, who carried a Kassia. The Accused’s wives were equipped with lathis and accompanied the rest of the attackers.
- The learned Sessions Judge found that Section 149 could not apply to the facts as found by him and each Accused person would be liable for his individual action.
- Thus, the convicted persons filed an appeal to the High Court. Sohanlal (deceased) had assisted four injuries which were all incised wounds. Injury No. 2 had been caused by a sharp-edged weapon. Mrs. Dhonkal had six contusions, one contused wound on the right parietal region and haematoma on the left side of his back.
Issues Involved:
- Whether the right of private defence was inflicted on the members of the Accused party?
- Whether the Accused convicted for voluntarily causing grievous hurt under Section 326 read with the Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also acquitted for punishment for murder under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860?
- Whether the Appeal is maintainable?
Contention of Petitioner:
The counsel for Petitioner’s contented that:
- High Court lookout that the injuries inflicted on the members of he Accused party were so numerous and extensive and involved two ladies, namely (Mst. Chawali and Mst. Kheevni). This lends support to the case set up in defence that the injuries which were inflicted by the Accused were Caused in self- defence.
- Thus, High Court stated that the Accused party was not guilty of any offence as injuries to Sohan Lal and Adram which were inflicted were in exercise of the right of defence of person.
Judgement:
The Accused were acquitted.
The appeal of Gopal, Dhanpat and Dhonkal is consequently allowed and they are acquitted. They were released on bail and their bail bonds shall stand cancelled.
Ratio Decidendi:
- Considering the facts as above stated above High Court found that injuries which were inflicted by the Accused party were in exercise of the right of self- defence as High Court observed that a part of the incident took place at the Gopal house.
- The male Accused may have taken up the weapons such as Ex. 1 and Ex. 6 presented by the prosecution at the trial, and may have assaulted the complainant-party. It cannot be ruled out that these persons accompanied by some other persons went to the house of Dhanpat and administered beating to the ladies of the family of Gopal and also the male accused.
- Therefore, High Court set aside their conviction and also acquitted Gopal under Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 but convicted Gopalunder Section 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
Conclusion:
To conclude the above case, Accused party were acquitted and their bail bonds stands cancelled. As a result, according to Section 96 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 any act done in exercise of the right of private defence shall not be called offence committed.
In this instant case Accused may have taken up weapons such as Ex. 1 and Ex. 6 produced by the prosecution at the trial, and assaulted complainant-party. Thus, High Court had taken appropriate decision that injuries inflicted on Sohan Lal and Adram were in exercise of the right of private defence.
Drafted By: Samanta Rao, CLS – Gitarattan International Business School
Edited by: Aashima Kakkar, Associate Editor, Law Insider
Published On: October 14, 2021 at 10:12 IST