Kiran Raj

On February 14, 2025, the Gauhati High Court issued an order  modifying the sentence of Border Security Force (BSF) Constable Tupe Subhash, who had previously been convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment by a General Security Forces Court (GSFC). The court determined that the case fell within Exception 1 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), reducing the conviction to Section 304 Part-I IPC and sentencing the petitioner to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, along with a fine.

The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Tupe Subhash, contesting his conviction and life imprisonment sentence imposed by the GSFC in connection with the deaths of fellow BSF personnel, Sagir Alam and Varadagiri Chinna Raydu. The case originated from an incident on August 14, 2012, when the petitioner, who was stationed at the 111 Battalion of BSF, shot his colleagues, resulting in their deaths. The GSFC found him guilty under Section 302 IPC, and the Special Director General, BSF Eastern Command, subsequently confirmed the sentence on September 15, 2024.

The petitioner’s plea contended that he had been subjected to repeated verbal abuse and ridicule by the deceased, particularly Sagir Alam. It was submitted that he acted in a fit of rage, provoked by continuous harassment. The defense further argued that the GSFC had not sufficiently considered mitigating factors and had erroneously disregarded the petitioner's claim of sudden and grave provocation, which warranted sentencing under Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC.

The respondents, which included the Union of India and senior BSF officials, defended the conviction and maintained that the trial was conducted in accordance with due process. They asserted that the petitioner had deliberately fired upon his colleagues and was, therefore, rightly convicted under Section 302 IPC.

A division bench comprising Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund reviewed the submissions and examined the evidence presented. The court noted that multiple witnesses had corroborated the petitioner’s claims of harassment, including incidents in which Sagir Alam had allegedly ridiculed and insulted him. Testimonies indicated that, on the day of the incident, the deceased not only continued his taunts but also spat at the petitioner, provoking a loss of self-control.

The court referred to testimony from witnesses PW-7, PW-10, and PW-13, stating: “The evidence clearly establishes that the petitioner had been subjected to persistent taunting and insults. On the day of the incident, the victim directed offensive remarks at the petitioner, which led to an uncontrollable reaction, resulting in the shooting.”

The court also noted that the petitioner had exhibited remorse after the incident, as evidenced by his subsequent attempt to take his own life. Citing established legal precedents, the court concluded that the circumstances justified the application of Exception 1 to Section 300 IPC, warranting a reduction in the severity of the sentence.

Based on its findings, the Gauhati High Court modified the sentence initially imposed by the GSFC. The revised punishment included:

• Conviction under Section 304 Part-I IPC instead of Section 302 IPC.

• Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.

• A fine of Rs. 1,000/-.

• In case of non-payment of the fine, an additional one-month rigorous imprisonment.

• Consideration of the period already undergone in custody as part of the total sentence.

• Additionally, the court directed that the petitioner’s conviction record be updated to reflect the amended charges.

Case Title: Tupe Subhash v. Union of India & Ors.

Case Number: WP(Crl.) No. 4/2019

Bench: Justice Kalyan Rai Surana, Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund

[Read/Download order]