Basdev v. State of Pepsu

III Semester B.B.A, LL.B. (Hons.) Course

CASE ANALYSIS OF BASDEV v. STATE OF PEPSU

Sum!tte" #$ S%%&s'! S'%rm% +BLL-+

Sum!tte" to$ r. en*!t' T'om%s

In the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Equivalent citations: 1956 I! "##$ 1956 SC! %6% &ench: i'ar$ ( Chandrase)hara INTODUCTION$

*he case &asdev v+ State of ,epsu is one of the landmar) cases decided on the issue of into-ication+ *he .ud/ement 0as delivered on 1 pril$1956 b' a division bench comprisin/ of 2ustice i'ar and 2ustice ( Chandrase)hara+ *he le/al provision on 0hich the 0hole case is based is Section #6 of the I+,+C+ It states: Offence requiring a particular intent or knowledge committed by one who is intoxicated +33In cases 0here an act done is not an offence unless done 0ith a particular )no0led/e or intent$ a  person 0ho does the act in a state of into-ication shall be liable to be dealt 0ith as if he had the same )no0led/e as he 0ould have had if he had not been into-icated$ unless the thin/ 0hich into-icated him 0as administered to him 0ithout his )no0led/e or a/ainst his 0ill+ BAC/0OUND OF THE CASE$

*he appellant &asdev of the villa/e of Hari/arh is a retired militar' 2amadar+ He is char/ed 0ith the murder of a 'oun/ bo' named 4a/har Sin/h$ a/ed about 15 or 16+ &oth of them and others of the same villa/e 0ent to attend a 0eddin/ in another villa/e+ ll of them 0ent to the house of the bride to ta)e the midda' meal on the 1th 4arch$ 195"+ Some had settled do0n in their seats and some had not+ So$ the appellant as)ed 4a/har Sin/h$ the 'oun/ bo' to step aside a little so that he ma' occup' a convenient seat+ &ut 4a/har Sin/h did not move+ *he appellant 0hipped out a pistol and shot the bo' in the abdomen+ *he in.ur' proved to be fatal+ *he Sessions Court accepted the contention of the accused that he 0as e-cessivel' drun) as the atmosphere 0as merr' due to the marria/e+ lso there 0as one 0itness a7ir Sin/h 8ambardar 0ho /ave the evidence that he 0as almost in an unconscious condition+ *his evidence and circumstances 0ere ta)en into account on the basis of 0hich the Sessions 2ud/e a0arded lesser penalt' to the appellant amountin/ to transportation of life+ n appeal 0as made to the ,epsu Hi/h court at ,atiala b' &asdev 0hich proved unsuccessful+ Special leave 0as /ranted b' this court pertainin/ to important questions mentioned belo0+ ISSUES$

1+ hether the appellant can avail the e-ception of into-ication+ + hether the offence committed b' the petitioner fell under section % of I+,+C or section %" of the I+,+C havin/ re/ard to the provisions of Section #6 of the I+,+C+ 1UESTION OF LA2$ +. *he important question arisin/ in this case is 0hether the appellant 0as into-icated to

such a level that it rendered him incapable to form the intention necessar' to constitute the crime or it 0as .ust that his mind 0as affected b' the drin) that he easil' /ave 0a' to some violent passion+ Section #6 is basicall' enacted to ta)e care of offences requirin/ a  particular intent or )no0led/e on the part of the into-icated offender+ It basicall' states that if the into-ication is involuntar'$ neither )no0led/e nor intention in committin/ the offence 0ill be presumed+ If ho0ever$ it is voluntar' onl' )no0led/e of the offence on the part of the offender 0ill be presumed but not intention in committin/ it+ In voluntar' into-ication$ intention 0ill be presumed seein/ the facts and circumstances of the case+ . *a)in/ into re/ard the de/ree of into-ication it is anal'sed 0hether the into-icated offender is in a position to understand the nature and consequences of his act+ &ased on this it is decided 0hether the offender can avail the e-ception of into-ication or not+ 3UD0EENT$ +. *he Court held that the offence is not reduced from murder to culpable homicide not

amountin/ to murder under the second part of section %" of the I+,+C+ *he conviction and sentence are ri/ht and the appeal is dismissed+ . *he appellant 0as not /ranted the e-ception of into-ication and it 0as found anal'sin/ the facts and circumstances of the case that the appellant 0as in a position to understand to under the nature and consequences of the act and his mind 0as not so obscured b' drin)in/ that it rendered him incapable to form the intent necessar' to constitute the crime of murder+ 4. *he court laid do0n the follo0in/ three rules: a+ *hat insanit'$ 0hether produced b' drun)enness or other0ise$ is a defence to the crime char/ed  b+ *hat evidence of drun)enness 0hich renders the accused incapable of formin/ the specific intent essential to constitute the crime should be ta)en into consideration 0ith the other facts proved in order to determine 0hether or not he had this intent c+ *hat evidence of drun)enness fallin/ short of a proved incapacit' in the accused to form the intent necessar' to constitute the crime$ and merel' establishin/ that his mind 0as affected b' drin) so that he more readil' /ave 0a' to some violent

 passion$ does not rebut the presumption that a man intends the natural consequences of his acts+ ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION$ +. It is presumed that a man intends the natural consequences of his act+ Ho0ever 

this presumption is rebutted in case 0here the person in into-icated to such a de/ree that he fails to understand the nature and consequences of his act+ . In the present case the court entered into the .ud/ement after anal'sin/ the facts and circumstances of the case+ *he .ud/es found that althou/h the accused 0as under the influence of drin)$ he 0as not so much under its influence that his mind 0as so obscured b' the drin) that there 0as incapacit' in him to form the required intention as stated+ 4. *he' observed throu/h the facts that at times the appellant sta//ered and 0as incoherent in his tal)$ but the same evidence sho0s that he 0as also capable of  movin/ himself independentl' and tal)in/ coherentl' as 0ell+ It 0as also proved that he came to the dar0a7a of (atha Sin/h ,++1 b' himself$ made a choice for  his o0n seat and that is 0h' he as)ed the deceased to move a0a' from his place+ nd 0hen finall' 0hen he realised 0hat he had done$ he requested the 0itness to  be for/iven sa'in/ that it bad happened from him+ It is throu/h these circumstances and facts that the Court entered into the .ud/ement+