Introduction 

• This is a landmark judgment relating to the plea of alibi which is relevant under Section 11 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA). 
• The Judgment was delivered by a 2- judge consisting of Justice YV Chandrachud and Justice AP Sen.  

Facts 

• The appellant was a motor-car driver and tenant in the outhouse of the deceased's family bungalow. 
• He developed an interest in the deceased’s sister, which was strongly opposed by the family, especially the deceased. 
• The deceased took active steps to prevent the appellant from pursuing his sister. 
• The appellant’s legal attempt to gain custody of the sister failed. 
• He was later arrested following a complaint that he had made indecent overtures toward her. 
• A day before the incident, the appellant allegedly threatened to kill the deceased if he continued to oppose the marriage. 
• The next day, while the deceased was returning home on his scooter after dropping his sister at school, the appellant shot him with a pistol. 
• The deceased died instantly. 
• The appellant was convicted under Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to death. 
• The High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. 

Issues Involved  

• Whether the Sessions and the High Court were correct in convicting the appellant under Section 302 of IPC? 

Observation  

• The Court observed the following with respect to circumstances leading to the crime: 
  • The appellant, a poor motor-car driver, was deeply offended when the deceased insulted him for his low social status and threatened him against marrying his sister. 
  • The dispute became a matter of social status, with the appellant believing the girl was not opposed to the marriage. 
  • The altercation from the previous evening did not constitute a "sudden provocation" that would reduce the murder charge, but the appellant’s mental turmoil was a relevant factor for sentencing. 
• It was observed by the Court that the deceased had no injuries apart from the gunshot wound and an abrasion likely caused by the shot. 
• Further, the fact that the scooter remained standing suggests that the deceased stopped upon seeing the appellant, leading to an exchange of heated words before the shooting. 
• The Court held the following with respect to the plea of alibi raised by the appellant: 
  • The appellant's alibi was not proven as the defense witnesses failed to establish his absence from the crime scene. 
  • A valid alibi must prove that the accused was too far from the crime scene to be present there. 
  • A valid alibi must prove that the accused was too far from the crime scene to be present there. 
• The Court held that the High Court and the Sessions Court were right in convicting the appellant under Section 302 of IPC. 
• The Court however, held that in this case death penalty would be extreme and hence it would be unsafe to award death penalty.  

Conclusion 

• Alibi is a defence which is relevant under Section 11 of IEA. 
• This judgment has gained relevance for explaining the plea of alibi and when it would be considered.