The right to self defence cannot be used as a pretext for a retributive offence to kill the other person, the Supreme Court has ruled.
"A right to defend does not include a right to launch an offensive, particularly when the need to defend no longer survives," a Bench comprising Justice Arijit Pasyat and Justice Lokeshwar Singh Penta held while partly allowing an appeal by an accused against the life sentence imposed by the Uttaranchal high court.
Accused Naveen Chandra was sentenced to death by a sessions court for the murder of his paternal uncle Ganesh Dutt, aunt Janki Devi and the couple's child Sandeep owing to a family dispute.
The sessions court had also convicted his parents Nanda Ballabh and Kamla Devi to life imprisonment for the same offence.
On an appeal, the high court acquitted the parents and commuted Naveen's death sentence to life imprisonment, after which he moved the Supreme Court with the plea that the murder was committed in self defence.
He claimed the murder was a sequel to an altercation with the victims and the killing was not pre-mediated.
However, the Supreme Court said the right to private defence is essentially a defensive right available under the statute only when the circumstances clearly justify it.
"It is a right of defence, not of retribution, expected to repel unlawful aggression and not a retaliatory measure," the Bench observed.
The Bench pointed out that in the present case, though Naveen was exercising his right to private defence, he had gone beyond that by continuing the attacks on the victims even after the threat to him ceased.
However, the apex court altered the conviction from Section 302 IPC to 304, Part 1 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and reduced the sentence to 10 years RI.
