BALA BAINE LINGA RAJU versus STATE OF A.P.

Citation: [2009] 7 S.C.R. 595 · Decided: 05-05-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 7 S.C.R. 595 
BALA BAINE LINGA RAJU 
A 
V. 
STATE OF A.P. 
Criminal Appeal No. 911 of 2009 
MAY 05, 2009 · 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.) 
• 
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - ss. 4 and 5 -
Applicability of the Act - Appellant stabbed husband of PW2 
-
with a scissor causing injuries to his lung and heart which 
proved fatal...,. Trial court convicted appellant uls.304 Part I c 
/PC and sentenced him to undergo seven years' imprisonment 
- High Court upheld conviction but directed release of 
appellant under the Act by purporting to grant appropriate 
amount of compensation to PW2 - Held: S.4 of the Act 
empowers the court to release a person on probation of good D 
> 
conduct, if the offence is not punishable with death or 
imprisonment for life -Appellant was found guilty under s.304 
Part I /PC which provides for imprisonment for life or 
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend 
to imprisonment for life - Thus, provisions of the said Act were 
E 
not applicable in case of appellant - High Court erred in 
~ 
invoking the provisions of the Act -- Judgment of conviction 
.. 
and sentence passed by trial courl accordingly restoreq -
-
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 300 and 304 Part /. 
.....: 
According to the prosecution, in course of a verbal 
F 
quarrel, appeUant came out of his house with a scissor 
and stabbed the husband of PW2 causing injuries to his 
lung and heart which proved fatal. Appellant was charged 
for alleged commission of offence under s.302 IPC. The 
trial court, however, convicted the appellant u/s.304 part I G 
J 
IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years' 
imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court upheld the 
conviction but directed release of the appellant under the 
595 
H 
596 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 7 S.C.R. 
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 by purporting to grant " 
A 
appropriate amount of compensation to PW2 . 
The question which arose for consideration in the 
present appeal was whether invocation of the Probation 
B 
of Offenders Act, 1958 by the High Court was justified. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1. Appellant was inside the house. He admittedly • 
was not a party to the quarrel. So far as he was concerned, 
neither PW-2 nor the deceased caused any provocation -
c to him. The manner in which the assault had taken place 
must also be noticed inasmuch as he had injured the lung 
and heart- of the deceased. [Para 9] (600-B-C] 
2.1. S.300 IPC provides that culpable homicide would 
D be murder if the act by which the death is caused is done 
with the intention of causing death or if it is done inter alia 
with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the 
offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the 
person to whom the harm is caused. Once it is held that 
E injury was caused on a vital part of the body with 
knowledge that it may cause death or such injury which 
is likely to cause death, the ingredients of provisions of 
s.300 must be held to have been proved in view of the 
decision of this Court in Virsa Singh. This case, thus, 
~ 
although attracts the principles of Virsa Singh in terms -
F whereof it was possible to arrive at a conclusion that the 
appellant in fact is guilty of commission of an offence 
under s.302 IPC, in absence of any appeal having been 
preferred by the State from the judgment of conviction 
and sentence passed by the Trial Judge, this Court is not 
G in a position to arrive at the said conclusion. [Paras 10, 
13, 14] (600-C-D; 603-A-D] 
l 
Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab AIR (1958) SC 465; Kesar 
Singh & Anr. v. State of Haryana (2008) 6 SCALE 433; State 
H of Andhra Pradesh v. Rayavarapu Punnayya and Anr (1976) 
' 
.. 
.4 
... 
J 
BALA BAINE LINGA RAJU V. STATE OF AP. 
597 
4 SCC 382; Mohd. Asifv. State of Uttaranchal (2009) 3 SCALE A 
695 and Mavila Thamban Nambiar v. State of Kera/a Al R 1997 
SC 687 ....: referred to. 
3.1. The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 was enacted 
to provide for the release of offenders on probation or 
_after due admonition and for matters connected therewith. 8 
5.4 of the said Act empowers th~ court to release a person 
on probation of good conduct, subject to the conditions 
. that the offence is not punishable with death or imprison-
ment for life. Only in the event, the provisions of the said 
Act are applicable, s.6 of the Act can be taken recourse C 
to. [Paras 15, 16] [603-D-F] 
3.2. Appellant was charged with commission of an 
offence under s.302
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.