Calling Family Land "Ancestral" Is Not Enough — Must Trace Four Generations Of Male Lineage To Stop Father From Selling It: Punjab & Haryana HC Marks Of Candidates In Public Exam Not Private Information, Disclosable Under RTI: Allahabad High Court Integrity of a Judge Is Difficult to Prove by Direct Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Adverse ACR Entry Against Judicial Officer When State Reorganisation Is Already Done, Section 103 Of Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act Cannot Undo It: Supreme Court Rules Sugarcane Societies Are Not Multi-State Bodies Bihar Cannot Take Over A Century-Old Library By Paying One Rupee As Compensation: Supreme Court Strikes Down 2015 Act Call Records Without Section 65-B Certificate Are Inadmissible, Oral Evidence Of Nodal Officer No Substitute: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Minority Shareholders Cannot Block Capital Reduction By Majority: Supreme Court Upholds Bharti Telecom's Buyout Of 1.09% Individual Investors At Rs.196.80 Per Share Travel Bans On Unvaccinated, No Disclosure Of Deaths Abroad: Supreme Court Finds COVID Vaccine Programme Violated Articles 14, 19 And 21 Bottle Cap Supplier Gets Anticipatory Bail In Spurious Liquor Case: Supreme Court Finds No Raid At His Premises, No Misuse Of Liberty DNA And Chemical Analyst Reports Cannot Be Read In Evidence Without Examining Scientific Experts: Bombay High Court Proof Of Agreement Alone Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Specific Performance - Continuous Readiness And Willingness Is A Condition Precedent: Chhattisgarh High Court Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Replace Proof: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Bank Clerk’s Dismissal in Rs. 38.67 Lakh Pension Account Case Cheque Dishonour Due To ‘Account Blocked’ Cannot Attract Section 138 NI Act When Drawer Had No Control Over Frozen Account: Karnataka High Court Mere Domestic Discord Or Harassment Is Not Abetment Of Suicide: Gujarat High Court Upholds Husband’s Acquittal Silence On Incriminating Circumstance Can Strengthen Prosecution Case: Gauhati High Court On Section 313 CrPC Even In Heinous Offences, Accused Cannot Be Kept In Jail Indefinitely: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail After 7 Years Of Trial Delay Acquittal On Benefit Of Doubt Cannot Rescue Police Officer From Removal: Kerala High Court Upholds Dismissal Despite Criminal Court's Not Guilty Verdict Trial Court Cannot Ignore High Court Directions: Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders Fresh Enquiry And Initiates Disciplinary Action State Cannot Shrug Responsibility For Vaccine Deaths: Supreme Court Directs Centre To Frame No-Fault Compensation Policy For COVID-19 Adverse Events Supreme Court Streamlines Procedural Safeguards For Passive Euthanasia

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