Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

  • In Ex. Ct. Mahadev vs Director General Border Security Force, the Supreme Court has held that if an accused takes the plea of private defence then the degree of burden of proof will not be beyond reasonable doubt.
  • The Court further held that it would be sufficient if he can show the preponderance of probabilities.
  • The background of this case is that the accused, serving in the BSF, had allegedly caused a civilian's death.
  • The General Security Force Court dismissed his plea of self defence and held him guilty of murder u/s 302 IPC.
  • Thereafter, the accused filed an appeal in the Delhi High Court which was also dismissed. 
  • Subsequently, an appeal was filed in the Apex Court.
  • The Counsel for the appellant contended that the High Court erred in rejecting his plea of self defence which he was forced to exercise due to the given circumstances.
  • He further argued that at the time of the said incident, the accused was confronted with intruders who 'gheraoed' him and therefore, he had no choice but to use his right of private defence.
  • The Ld. Court observed that the right to self defence is founded on the instinct of self-preservation and protection and the same has been enshrined in the Indian Penal Code u/s 96-106.
  • The Court noted that to decide whether a person has acted in exercise of the right of private defence would be determined by the facts of each case.
  • The Court took reliance on Rizan and Another v. State of Chhattisgarh, where it was held that the accused need not prove the existence of the right of self defence beyond reasonable doubt and that preponderance of probabilities will be the degree of proof.
  • Referring the principles to the present case, the Court noticed that due to apprehension of imminent threat that led the accused to fire from his rifle in the exercise of private defence. 
  • The Court further said that since the degree of burden of proof to prove existence of private defence is preponderance of probabilities, the burden has been discharged by the appellant.
  • Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal. 


 

"Loved reading this piece by Megha Nautiyal?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  105  Report



Comments
img

Course