Humans are different, have unpredictable behaviour: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, March 23

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that human behaviour cannot be generalised. Humans are different and have unpredictable behaviour, as an outcome of their varied environments and innate tendencies, the Bench has asserted.

The ruling came in a murder case where the Bench was told that the wife of an accused was expecting and there was no reason for him to indulge in such a heinous offence. “Some love war and crime, others make efforts to impart education, medi-care, raising standards of living and peace,” Justice Anoop Chitkara of the High Court asserted.

Justice Chitkara observed that the contentions that there was no reason for the accused to indulge in such a heinous offence, given his education and his position in a corporate job and that his wife was expecting and likely to deliver in those days, could not be considered “a sure-shot response of every father expecting a baby”. It was highly subjective and would vary largely from person to person.

The ruling assumes significance as the probability of committing an offence based on the person’s position, nature and circumstances is often referred to by the defence counsel in criminal cases in an attempt to buttress the contention that the accused could not have indulged in the crime because of his persona and circumstances.

The ruling makes it clear that different individuals behave and act differently even in the same set of circumstances. Any assumption regarding a person’s behaviour in a particular manner based on the state of affairs will only be fallacious as his conduct cannot be generalised.

The case pertains to the death of a person and injury to another in a “roadside accident”. As per the initial FIR registered on the statement of the victim’s father, he was walking with his son and his friend. At the time of the “accident”, he was 50 metres behind. Justice Chitkara observed that it was undisputed that the FIR was registered for a “roadside accident” as per the initial version in the FIR based on the statement of the victim’s father.

In his detailed order, Justice Chitkara also took note of the state counsel’s submission that the crime resulted from a well-planned conspiracy. Three accused, all close friends, hatched the conspiracy and committed the murder and also attempted murder.

“Without commenting on the merits of the case, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons mentioned, the petitioners fail to make a case for bail at this stage,” Justice Chitkara asserted, adding that the petitioners could file fresh bail applications in changed circumstances or after recording the statements of witnesses other than official and formal.

Murder case

The ruling came in a murder case where the Bench was told that the wife of an accused was expecting and there was no reason for him to indulge in such a heinous offence. “Some love war and crime, others make efforts to impart education, medi-care, raising standards of living and peace,” Justice Anoop Chitkara of the High Court asserted.