Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.17 seconds)
Bare Lal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 September, 2024 cites

Jangir Singh vs The State Of Punjab on 31 October, 2018

It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the trial Court erred in convicting and awarding the jail sentence to present appellant. It is further Signature Not Verified Signed by: AVINASH BHARGAV Signing time: 04-Sep-24 10:25:40 AM 2 CRA-2256-2018 submitted that dispute erupted because of some admonition extended to the children of complainant side regarding alleged mischief committed by them for procuring jack fruits from the premises of appellant. Thereafter, both the parties met at Dhaba, where sudden altercation precipitated, the course of events in such a manner, whereby Rakesh, who was wielding katta tried to fire over present appellant. In relation thereof, under right to private defence, appellant opened fire from the same katta over deceased Lokendra. It was a case of single gunshot injury. Even if, a right to private defence is exceeded then even case would fall under first exception to Section 304 of IPC and it would not be a case of murder per se under Section 302 of IPC. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon judgment of Apex Court in this regard in the case of Jangir Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2019) 13 SCC 813 . Appellant has already suffered seven years and ten months of incarceration including pre and post-trial conviction. Appellant has good case on merits and hearing of appeal would take some time. That apart, he undertakes to abide by the terms and conditions as imposed by this Court. He further undertakes not to be a source of embarrassment and harassment to the complainant side in any manner. On the aforesaid submissions, he prays for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to present appellant.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 7 - N V Ramana - Full Document
1