STATE OF U.P. versus LAKHMI

Citation: [1998] 1 S.C.R. 850 · Decided: 12-02-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. PUNCHHI, K.T. THOMAS, M. SRINIVASAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF U.P. 
v. 
LAKHMI 
FEBRUARY 12, 1998 
B 
[M.M. PUNCHHI CJI., K.T. THOMAS AND M. SRINIVASAN, JJ.] 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-S. 313-Examination of Accused:.._ 
Incu/patory admissions-Sub-section (4)-Words "may be taken into 
C consideration in such enquiry or trai/"--Scope of 
D 
Indian Penal Code, 1860--S.300-Accused adopting alternative defence 
during ,examination under Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code of 
unsoundness of mind-Exception I to S.300 not pleaded-When could the 
accused be denied benefit of the exception. 
S.300-Exception I-Burden of proof-On accused-Accused entitled 
to discharge burden either through defence evidence or through prosecution 
evidence showing preponderance of probability. 
S.300-A1urder Trial-Post mortem-Non-examination of doctor-Effect 
E of-Held,, not fatal in the instant case on account of accused admitting case 
was one of homicide. 
S.300-Exception /-Benefit of-Entitlement of accused-When. 
The deceased was the young wife of the respondent-Accused. With 
F their two little children, they were living in the house of the accused. 
Intermittent skirmishes used to erupt between them as the deceased used to 
accuse the respondent-Accused for dissipating money on alcoholic' drinks. 
During the wee hours of 8.2.1970 accused inflicted blows with a Phali (a 
spade like agricultural implement) on the head of the deceased, her skull 
was smashed and she died on the spot Hearing the screams of the deceaseli--' 
G Wife, P.W. 2 who was working in the adjacent field, rushed up and peeped 
through the window and witnessed the accused thrashing his wife with the 
said weapon. 
In the trial, the doctor who conducted the post-mortem was not examined 
H by the prosecution. The accused did not dispute the fact that bis wife (deceased) 
-
~o 
"".. 
-
STATE OF U.P. v. LAKHMI 
851 
was murdered by inflicting blows on her head. The accused gave an answer A 
_,...1._ 
to a question put to him in examination under Section 313 of the Criminal 
"' 
Procedure Code which contained his admission of killing his wife with 
Kunda. The Sessions Judge repelled the defence under Section 84 of the 
Indian Penal Code that the accused was a person of unsound mind and by 
reason of such impairment did not know the nature of the act committed by 
him, and convicted the accused under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him B 
to imprisonment for life. 
The accused preferred appeal in the High Court which was allowed. 
Hence this appeal by the State, contending that the High Court had gone 
wrong in not attaching any importance to the statement of the accused made C 
under S. 313 Cr. P.C .. The contention of the respondent was that-I the doctor 
who conducted the post-mortem examination was not examined and in the 
absence of legally proved medical evidence there could be no finding that the 
deceased died due to blows inflicted with "Phali", 2 that the accused was a 
person of unsound mind and should be afforded the benefit under Section 84 
I.P.C. 
D 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : l. The High Court has gone wrong in holding that the 
prosecution has failed to prove that the deceased was murdered by the 
accused. It has not given due regard to the cogent circumstances leading to E 
the only conclusion that the deceased was slashed to death by the accused. 
[854-D) 
2. The need of law for examining the accused with reference to 
incriminating circumstances appearing against him in prosecution evidence 
is not for observance of a ritual in a trial, nor is it a mere formality. It has F 
a salutary purpose. It enables the Court to be apprised of what the indicted 
person has to say about the circumstances pitted .against him by the 
prosecution. It helps the court to effectively appreciate and evaluate the 
evidence in the case. If an accused admits any incriminating circumstance 
appearing in evidence against him there is no warrant that those admissions 
should altogether be ignored merely on the ground that such admissions G 
were advanced as a defence strategy. [854-F-Hf 
3. Sub-Section (4) of Section 313 of the Code contains necessary 
support to the legal position that answers given by the accused during such 
examination are intended to be considered by the Court. The words "may be 
taken into consideration in such enquiry or trial" in sub-section (4) would H 
852 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1998] I S.C.R. 
A amount to a legislative guideline for the Court to give due weight to such 
answers; thoug

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