PARTAP versus THE STATE OF U.P.

PARTAP versus THE STATE OF U.P.

The appellant established by preponderance of probability that he fired the fatal shot in exercise of his right of private defence, the prosecution failed to prove the absence of such a right beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction cannot be sustained.

Parties
Appellant: Partap; Respondent: State of U.P.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 September 1975
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated 24th July, 1970 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 581 of 1968
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction set aside and appellant acquitted.
Legal Topics
Self Defence, Burden of Proof, Section 105 Evidence Act
Criminal Law Evidence Self Defence Burden of Proof Section 105 Evidence Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Partap

Appellant

State of U.P.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated 24th July, 1970 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 581 of 1968

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the burden of proof on an accused pleading self-defence under Section 105 of the Evidence Act?
  2. 2 Was the appellant entitled to acquittal on the ground of self-defence?

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant established by preponderance of probability that he fired the fatal shot in exercise of his right of private defence, the prosecution failed to prove the absence of such a right beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction cannot be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction set aside and appellant acquitted.

Orders

  • The appellant is acquitted.