LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/subhash-subanna-ors-vs-state-of-karnataka-ministry-of-home-affairs-20240410/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Subhash @ Subanna & Ors. vs State of Karnataka Ministry of Home Affairs

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
10 April 2024
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 328 of 2012
Result
Dismissed
Bench
Sudhanshu Dhulia, Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale
Citation
[2024] 4 S.C.R. 328 : 2024 INSC 294
Acts & Sections
IPC
Supreme Court Reports [2024] 4 S.C.R. 328 : 2024 INSC 294
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.
Headnote

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, 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]

Keywords: Murder · Right of private defence · Provocation · Injured eyewitnesses

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

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 Nos.1 and 3 (accused Nos 2 & 4) under Sections 324 and 326 of IPC as awarded by Trial Court.
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →