Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Supreme Court Alters Conviction and Sentences Indian Army Lance Naik Under Section 304 (Part I) of IPC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has altered the conviction and sentence of an Indian Army Lance Naik in Criminal Appeal No. 1791 of 2023. The appellant, Lance Naik Gursewak Singh, was earlier convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 69 of the Army Act, 1950, by the Court Martial for an unfortunate incident that occurred in 2004.

The apex court, comprising of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, examined the circumstances surrounding the incident and the appellant's conduct during the altercation. The incident involved a sudden fight between the appellant and another soldier, Lance Naik Kala Singh, over the issue of seniority. The appellant, in a heated moment, snatched the rifle from the deceased and fired a single bullet, tragically resulting in the death of the fellow soldier.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court considered the applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder in certain situations. The court noted that the incident lacked premeditation or intention to cause death and held that Exception 4 was applicable in this case.

Justice Abhay S. Oka, delivering the judgment, stated, "The appellant, in the facts of the case, cannot be said to have acted in such a cruel manner which will deprive him of the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC." The court found that the appellant's act was not characterized by cruelty, and he had fired only one bullet despite having more rounds in the rifle.

Taking into account the appellant's good conduct and the period of approximately 9 years and 3 months he had already served in incarceration, the Supreme Court deemed it an appropriate sentence. Consequently, the appellant's conviction was altered to Section 304 (Part I) of IPC, and he was sentenced to the period already served.

Date of Decision: July 27, 2023

Gursewak Singh vs Union of India & Anr.     

Latest Legal News