2022 SCMR 2012
It is established principle of criminal jurisprudence that the defence is not under obligation to prove its version and the burden on it is not as heavy as on the prosecution rather the defence is only to show the glimpse that its version is true. The record clearly reveals that there was no conventional enmity between the parties and the only reason as to why the petitioner could have committed the murders was nothing but his having seen the two deceased together in an amorous pursuit. In such like cases, the analogy can be drawn from the statutory law prevalent in United Kingdom called Homicide Act, 1957 wherein if a crime is committed due to mental or psychological compulsion, it squarely falls within the ambit of diminished liability. It is a legal doctrine that absolves an accused person of part of the liability for his criminal act if he suffers from such state of mind as to substantially impair his responsibility in committing or being a party to an alleged criminal act. In the present case as the murders were committed under the impulses of ghairat and grave and sudden provocation, the doctrine of diminished liability would be squarely attracted providing mitigation to the punishment awarded to the petitioner. In these circumstances, we are of the firm view that the case in hand is indeed a case of grave and sudden provocation which attracts the provisions of Section 302(c) PPC.
Even otherwise, it is human psychology that if someone comes across the situation like it, as is disclosed in the present case, the situation would be dealt with by individual depending upon his temperament, caste, race, creed, tribe, social status and the area from where the individual hails. This aspect also imprints a lasting impact regarding the response keeping in view the previous antecedents not only of the individual but the family/tribe he belongs. In the instant case, all these factors must have contributed towards the act of the petitioner, hence, as stated in the preceding paragraph, the case of the petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of Section 302(c) PPC.
0 Comments