Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

"High Court's Reversal of Acquittal 'Perverse,' Emphasizes Importance of Section 84 IPC in Issues of Insanity"- SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has castigated the High Court for reversing the acquittal of an appellant-accused who had initially been found not guilty by the Trial Court on the grounds of insanity under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Supreme Court underscored the difference between legal and medical insanity, quoting from its previous decisions: "An accused who seeks exoneration from liability of an act under Section 84 of IPC has to prove legal insanity and not medical insanity."

The Supreme Court painstakingly reviewed evidence provided by both the defense and the prosecution, including medical records and testimonies. The appellant-accused had been treated for acute and transient psychotic disorder and was under medication for psychiatric ailments. "The abnormal/insane behaviour of the appellant-accused at the time of the assault and immediately thereafter is worth notice," the judgment read.

Drawing on legal precedents, the Supreme Court reemphasized the importance of the general burden of proof resting on the prosecution. "If the conclusion of the Trial Court is plausible, merely because another view is possible on reappreciation of evidence, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of acquittal," the judgment highlighted.

Supreme Court also expressed dissatisfaction with the High Court's reversal of the appellant-accused’s acquittal by stating, "the High Court had reversed the finding of acquittal and convicted the appellant mainly on reappreciation of evidence by holding that the Trial Court erred in extending the benefit of Section 84 of IPC, without even recording a finding that the Trial Court’s finding is perverse."

Date of Decision: 13 September 2023

RUPESH MANGER (THAPA) VS STATE OF SIKKIM                                    

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/13-Sep-2023_RUPESH_MANGER_VS_STATE_SIKKIM.pdf"]

Latest Legal News