InCriminal Appeal No. 2069 of 2022 -SC- Supreme Court says Sikkim High Court erred in reversing acquittal of man who pleaded insanity
Justice J.B. Pardiwala & Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra [13-09-2023]

Read Order:Rupesh Manger (Thapa) V. State of Sikkim

Chahat Varma

New Delhi, September 14, 2023: The Supreme Court has upheld the acquittal of a man accused of murdering his grandfather. The Top Court noted that the Trial Court had considered all the evidence and had come to a reasoned conclusion that the man was insane at the time of the crime and the Sikkim High Court had made an error in overturning the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court.

The present appeals had challenged the Sikkim High Court’s judgment, which had reversed the appellant's acquittal by the Trial Court and had convicted the appellant for the offense under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Briefly stated, the prosecution had alleged that the appellant had committed the murder of his grandfather. Before the trial could begin, the appellant raised a plea of insanity, claiming that he was not mentally sound at the time of the offense. The Trial Court, after considering the evidence and within the scope of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code, concluded that the appellant was incapable of understanding the nature of his actions due to unsoundness of mind and acquitted him. However, the State appealed this decision, and the High Court reversed the acquittal.

The division bench comprising of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra took note of several pieces of evidence, including the testimony of PW-1, who mentioned that the appellant had a strong affection for the deceased and loved him deeply. Additionally, PW-13's evidence indicated that the appellant approached her as she was leaving the scene and inquired about what he had done to his grandfather. Moreover, villagers who arrived at the scene shortly after the incident testified that the appellant was present and did not attempt to flee, which was an unusual behaviour for a person in such circumstances.

The bench further observed that when the appellant was arrested, a medical examination conducted by PW-14 indicated that he appeared to be clinically under the influence of some psychotropic substance. Additionally, the appellant's behaviour after attacking the deceased with a sharp-edged weapon, including attempting to remove the windpipe from the neck of the deceased, was described as strange and abnormal. These actions strongly suggested that the appellant was suffering from insanity at the time of the incident.

The bench stated also that it was settled that the judgment of acquittal can be reversed by the Appellate Court only when there was perversity and not by taking a different view on reappreciation of evidence.

Thus, the bench, considering the evidence presented, including the medical evidence indicating the mental illness of the appellant and his abnormal behaviour at the time of the incident, concluded that the view taken by the Trial Court was not perverse.