RUPESH MANGER (THAPA) versus STATE OF SIKKIM

Citation: [2023] 12 S.C.R. 578 · Decided: 13-09-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.B. PARDIWALA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2023] 12 S.C.R. 578 : 2023 INSC 826
578
CASE DETAILS
RUPESH MANGER (THAPA)
v.
STATE OF SIKKIM
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 2069-2070 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 13, 2023
[J. B. PARDIWALA AND PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: High Court reversed the order of acquittal 
of the trial Court and convicted appellant-accused u/s.302 IPC, whether 
the case of the appellant-accused falls within the exception u/s. 84 of IPC 
or not.
Penal Code, 1860 – Appellant-accused had attacked the victim-
deceased with sharp-edged weapon causing his death – Appellant 
pleaded insanity:
Held: During preliminary examination, CW-1-doctor categorically 
deposed that going by the case history of the accused prepared by the 
Hospital, appellant had earlier been treated for acute and transient 
psychotic disorder – As per the opinion of this witness, the appellant-
accused seemed to have major depressive disorder with psychotic feature 
– On examination, the appellant-accused was found to have partially 
impaired judgment due to perceptive auditory hallucinations – The 
medicines prescribed were for the accused’s psychiatric ailments and the 
ailment was relapse able and there is every chance of attack anytime – Apart 
from the above medical evidence, the abnormal/insane behaviour of the 
appellant-accused at the time of the assault – In her cross-examination, 
PW-13 admits that accused-appellant even told her that he did not know 
as to what he had done to his grandfather/deceased – The other villagers 
who reached at the spot soon after the incident have stated that when they 
arrived at the spot the appellant-accused was present and was not trying 
to fl ee from there – This behaviour of the appellant-accused was not of 
a normal person – Also, when the appellant-accused was arrested, PW-
579
14 medically examined him and found that he appeared to be clinically 
under the infl uence of some psychotropic substance – It is also to be seen 
that after the appellant-accused attacked the deceased by a sharp-edged 
weapon which was later snatched by PW-1, he was trying to take out the 
windpipe from the neck of the deceased which was already cut – This 
action of the appellant-accused was weird and abnormal – This is clearly 
indicative of the fact that he was suff ering from insanity at the time of 
incident – Therefore, the High Court erred in setting aside the judgment 
of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court. [Paras 16, 17 and 18]
Appeal – Appellate Court – Reversal of acquittal:
Held: It is settled that the judgment of acquittal can be reversed 
by the Appellate Court only when there is perversity and not by taking 
a diff erent view on reappreciation of evidence – If the conclusion of the 
Trial Court is plausible one, merely because another view is possible 
on reappreciation of evidence, the Appellate Court should not disturb 
the fi ndings of acquittal and substitute its own fi ndings to convict the 
accused. [Para 24]
Penal Code, 1860 – s. 84 – Legal insanity and medical insanity – 
discussed.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Chapter XXV – discussed.
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakker v. State of Gujarat [1964] 7 SCR 
361; Prakash Nayi Alias Sen v. State of Goa (2023) 5 SCC 673 – relied 
on.  
State of Rajasthan v. Abdul Mannan (2011) 8 SCC 65 : [2011] 7 SCR 
1099; Devidas Loka Rathod v. State of Maharashtra (2018) 7 SCC 718 : 
[2018] 7 SCR 767; Ratan Lal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (1970) 3 SCC 
533 : [1971] 3 SCR 251; Surendra Mishra v. State of Jharkhand (2011) 11 
SCC 495 : [2011] 1 SCR 133; Hari Singh Gond v. State of M.P. (2008) 16 
SCC 109 : [2008] 12 SCR 949; Bapu v. State of Rajasthan (2007) 8 SCC 
66 : [2007] 7 SCR 917 – referred to.
RUPESH MANGER (THAPA) v. STATE OF SIKKIM 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2023] 12 S.C.R.
580
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED 
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal Nos. 
2069-2070 of 2022.
From the Judgment and Order dated 24.08.2022 and 05.09.2022 of 
the High Court of Sikkim at Gangtok in Criminal Appeal No.08 of 2020.
Appearances:
A. Sirajudden, Sr. Adv., Tilak Raj Pasi, Satyapal Khushal Chand Pasi, 
Advs. for the Appellant.
Sameer Abhyankar, Ms. Vani Vandana Chhetri, Ms. Nishi Sangtani, 
Ms. Sugandh Rathore, Naman Jain, Advs. for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT/ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT
JUDGMENT
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.
1. These appeals would call in question the legality and validity of 
the judgment of conviction and or

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.