Parnerkar v. R.

Parnerkar v. R.

Where the evidentiary record, stripped of speculation, contains no evidence upon which a reasonable jury could find a wrongful act or insult as required by s.203(2), the trial judge must as a matter of law refuse to leave the defence of provocation to the jury; applying that test, the tearing of the letter and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1974] SCR 449
Parties
Appellant/accused: Shashikumar Badurao Parnerkar; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 1973
Procedural Posture
Criminal Non Capital Murder (appeal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Hall and Laskin JJ. dissenting
Legal Topics
Provocation, Automatism, Insanity, Manslaughter, Trial Judge Functions, Criminal Code S.203
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Provocation Automatism Insanity Manslaughter Trial Judge Functions Criminal Code S.203

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shashikumar Badurao Parnerkar

Appellant/accused

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Non Capital Murder (appeal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in leaving provocation to the jury
  2. 2 Whether tearing the letter and alleged racial slur amounted to a wrongful act or insult under s.203
  3. 3 Whether psychiatrist evidence of dissociation constituted automatism or amounted to insanity under M'Naghten

Ratio Decidendi

Where the evidentiary record, stripped of speculation, contains no evidence upon which a reasonable jury could find a wrongful act or insult as required by s.203(2), the trial judge must as a matter of law refuse to leave the defence of provocation to the jury; applying that test, the tearing of the letter and the alleged slur did not supply such evidence and provocation should not have been left to the jury, and the Court of Appeal was correct to set aside the manslaughter verdict and order a new trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Hall and Laskin JJ. dissenting

Orders

  • Verdict of manslaughter set aside
  • New trial ordered on indictment for non-capital murder