Right to Self-Defence Must Be Balanced With Proportionality – Conviction Upheld – Bombay High Court
In a groundbreaking judgment, the Bombay High Court has emphasized the importance of proportionality when asserting the right to self-defence. The ruling, which stemmed from a case involving a dispute between two parties that turned violent, reaffirms the principles governing self-defence and sheds light on the application of criminal law.
In its observations, the court highlighted that the right to self-defence, though fundamental, must be exercised with restraint and a sense of proportion. The judgment emphasized that violence used in self-defence should not exceed what is necessary to protect oneself or others from harm.
“…the means and the force a threatened person adopts at the spur of the moment to ward off the danger and to save himself or his property cannot be weighed in golden scales. Nonetheless, the exercise of the right of private defence can never be vindictive or malicious,” the Bombay High Court stated, emphasizing the need for a balanced response to a threat.
The case involved an altercation between two parties, where one party claimed they were defending themselves and their family. The accused had invoked the right to self-defense, asserting that they were in immediate danger during the confrontation.
In its judgment, the court noted that while the right to self-defence is essential, it does not authorize undue or excessive violence. The court cautioned against the use of disproportionate force in self-defence, emphasizing that the response should match the threat faced.
To determine whether the right to self-defence applies, the court considered various factors, including the suddenness of the confrontation and whether both parties were involved in mutual provocation.
“…the right of private defence is available only to one who is suddenly confronted with the necessity of averting an impending danger not of self-creation. Necessity must be present, real or apparent,” the judgment stated.
Bombay High Court held that, in this case, the accused had exceeded the limits of self-defence, resulting in culpable homicide. The judgment serves as a significant legal precedent, clarifying the boundaries of self-defence in cases where violence erupts in response to threats.
Date of Decision: 13 September 2023
Manohar VS The State of Maharashtra
