Intoxication cannot be used as a defence by an accused to escape criminal charges, the Supreme Court has held.
“At times, it [intoxication] can be considered a mitigating circumstance if the accused is not a habitual drinker; otherwise, it has to be considered an aggravating circumstance,” said a Bench of Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and Vikramajit Sen.
Writing the judgment, Justice Radhakrishnan said the accused could avail himself of the defence of drunkenness only when intoxication produced such a condition that he lost “the requisite intention for the offence.”
The judgment came on an appeal by Bhagwan Tukaram Dange, who, along with his father, was charged with setting his wife ablaze. The trial court in Maharashtra awarded Dange life sentence and the sentence was upheld by the Bombay High Court.
Dismissing the appeal, the Bench said Dange was “presumed to know the consequences of his action, of having lit the matchstick and set fire to the saree of the deceased, after his father sprinkled kerosene on her. The accused was correctly chargesheeted under Section 302 of the IPC, and we find no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence.”
However, as the appellant had already suffered 16 years of sentence without remission, “the State government is directed to consider remission, and, if that be so, he may be set free if the period undergone by him without remission satisfies the requirement,” the Bench said.
