LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
βš–οΈ Ask the AI about your situation:πŸš— Car AccidentπŸ’Ό Work / Job🏠 Housing / EvictionπŸ‘ͺ Family / DivorceπŸ“‹ Contract DisputeπŸ’° Money Owed

SUBHASH @ SUBANNA & ORS. versus STATE OF KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

Citation: [2024] 4 S.C.R. 328 · Decided: 10-04-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHANSHU DHULIA · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 4 S.C.R. 328 : 2024 INSC 294
Subhash @ Subanna & Ors. 
v. 
State of Karnataka Ministry of Home Affairs
(Criminal Appeal No. 328 of 2012)
10 April 2024
[Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prasanna B. Varale,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the 
High Court convicting and sentencing accused no. 1 u/s. 302, and 
accused no. 2 and 4 u/ss. 324 and 326 IPC.
Headnotes
Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 302 and 324 – Murder – Voluntarily 
causing hurt by dangerous weapon or means – Right of 
private defence, if applicable – On facts, morning incident 
wherein quarrel between the complainant and accused on 
account of blocking the way and accused persons hurled 
abuses to her – In the evening, the complainant informed her 
father about the incident, the father-victim went to the house 
of accused persons to enquire, wherein he was assaulted by 
the accused persons, resulting in his death – Complainant, 
her brother and mother followed the victim and witnessed the 
attack – Accused no. 1 convicted and sentenced for offence 
punishable u/s. 302, and accused no. 2 and 4 u/ss. 324 and 
326 and others u/s. 323, by the courts below – Interference:
Held: On the assessment of the evidence of the prosecution, 
it reveals that though there was a verbal exchange between 
the victim and the accused persons, but not in the form of a 
provocation by the victim to the accused – Evidence clearly 
show that that there was a dispute on account of the pathway; 
that the victim was alone, he went to the house of the accused 
persons to make an inquiry, but he had not entered in the house 
and on the contrary, accused persons armed with stick, chopper 
and stone attacked the victim; and that neither the complainant 
nor her brother carried any weapon – Evidence of the injured 
eyewitnesses shows that the intention of the accused was to do 
away with the victim – If right of private defence is applied and 
the facts are appreciated, it is clear that the victim was unarmed, 
[2024] 4 S.C.R. 
329
Subhash @ Subanna & Ors. v.  
State of Karnataka Ministry of Home Affairs
whereas the accused persons who were armed led a brutal attack 
on the victim by stick, by koita and stone – High Court rightly 
upheld the judgment and order of trial court, thus, does not call 
for interference. [Paras 28-34, 36]
Case Law Cited
Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2010] 
1 SCR 642 : AIR (2010) SC 1212; Virsa Singh v. State 
of Punjab [1958] 1 SCR 1495 : AIR (1958) SC 465 – 
referred to.
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860.
List of Keywords
Murder; Right of private defence; Provocation; Injured eyewitnesses.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 328 
of 2012
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.04.2011 of the High Court of 
Karnataka at Gulbarga in CRLA No. 3601 of 2010
Appearances for Parties
Ms. Kiran Suri, Sr. Adv., S.J. Amith, Ms. Vidushi Garg, Dr. Mrs. Vipin 
Gupta, Advs. for the Appellants.
D. L. Chidananda, Ravindera Kumar Verma, Advs. for the Respondent.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Prasanna B. Varale, J.
1.	
By way of present appeal, the appellants challenged the judgment and 
order dated 20th April, 2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka 
in Criminal Appeal No. 3601/2010, thereby confirming the conviction 
and sentence of the Trial Court in Sessions Case No.213/2009 which 
had convicted appellants (accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4) under Section 
302 of IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. Additionally 
the High Court also upheld the conviction and sentence of appellant 
330
[2024] 4 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Nos.1 and 3 (accused Nos 2 & 4) under Sections 324 and 326 of 
IPC as awarded by Trial Court.
2.	
The First Information Report No.18/2009 was lodged at Kamalpur 
Police Station, Gulbarga against the accused persons for commission 
of offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 504, 323, 324 and 302 
r/w Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, on the basis of complaint 
submitted by Kumari Sangeeta D/o Mahadevappa Natikar. The 
Complaint refers to the incident occurred on 18th February, 2009 at 
7.00 a.m. (we may refer to this incident as a prequel to the fateful 
incident which occurred on the same day in the evening). It was 
submitted in the report that a day earlier i.e., on 17th February, 2009, 
uncle of the complainant brought fire wood which was dumped on 
the way, blocking the path of the complainant. Thus, Sangeeta tried 
to reach the said pat

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