[Criminal Trial] Law Does Not Taboo Adopting Of The Alternate Pleas By Accused: SC [Read Judgment]

The law does not taboo adopting of the alternate pleas, remarked the Supreme Court while observing that a murder accused can take a plea that he was not at all involved in the act which resulted in the death of the deceased, but that does not deprive him/her of the right to establish the fact that the case against him would still be embraced within any of the exceptions under Section 300 IPC. The accused in this case, along with his mother, was tried for murder of his wife. He was ultimately convicted by the Trial Court, which was later affirmed by the High Court. Both the courts concurrently held that the case of suicide set up by the accused was a completely false plea. Before the Apex Court, the counsel for the accused had confined the submission to the plea of alteration of the conviction under Section 302 of the IPC to under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC. In this context, the bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph said: The fact that a false case is set up by itself may not deprive an accused of the right to establish the fact that the case against him would still be embraced within any of the exceptions under Section 300 IPC. The law does not taboo adopting of the alternate pleas. Ultimately, the question would fall to be decided, no doubt, on the basis of appreciation of evidence and the requirements of law flowing from the particular 24 provision of law. The accused may also be entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt. Examining the evidence on record, the bench observed that there is nothing to establish the giving of any provocation leave alone a grave and sudden provocation. Upholding the High Court judgment, the bench said: "The act of the appellant in the facts of this case clearly show that he has throttled his wife. None of the exceptions in Section 300 are attracted. The act amounts to murder within the meaning of Section 300 of the IPC."Case name: Paul vs. State of KeralaCase no.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.38 of 2020Coram: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM JosephCounsel: Advocate Renjith B. Marar for AppellantClick here to Read/Download JudgmentRead Judgment

[Criminal Trial] Law Does Not Taboo Adopting Of The Alternate Pleas By Accused: SC [Read Judgment]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags