KASHI RAM AND ORS. versus STATE OF M.P.

KASHI RAM AND ORS. versus STATE OF M.P.

All accused were acting in exercise of right of private defence of person; only accused Ramesh exceeded this right by firing at fleeing members, causing death and was held liable under Section 304 Part II IPC, not murder. Other accused acquitted as there was no evidence they acted after the right of defence ceased.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Kashi Ram; Appellant: Teekaram; Appellant: Suresh; Appellant: Ratna @ Ratanlal; Appellant: Nanakram; Appellant: Ramesh; Respondent: State of Madhya Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Madhya Pradesh High Court
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Murder, Culpable Homicide, Right of Private Defence, Unlawful Assembly, Self Defence, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Murder Culpable Homicide Right of Private Defence Unlawful Assembly Self Defence Burden of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kashi Ram

Appellant

Teekaram

Appellant

Suresh

Appellant

Ratna @ Ratanlal

Appellant

Nanakram

Appellant

Ramesh

Appellant

State of Madhya Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Madhya Pradesh High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused were entitled to right of private defence
  2. 2 Whether the accused exceeded the right of private defence
  3. 3 Applicability of Section 149 IPC for unlawful assembly

Ratio Decidendi

All accused were acting in exercise of right of private defence of person; only accused Ramesh exceeded this right by firing at fleeing members, causing death and was held liable under Section 304 Part II IPC, not murder. Other accused acquitted as there was no evidence they acted after the right of defence ceased.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • All convictions and sentences by High Court set aside
  • Accused Ramesh convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC on two counts, sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment each, sentences to run concurrently