In Rakesh Dutt Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand (Supreme Court, Aug 28, 2025), a doctor shot his attacker in self-defence after being fired upon during a monetary dispute. The Trial Court convicted him under Section 304 Part I IPC, and the High Court upheld it. The Supreme Court, however, acquitted him, recognizing his right to private defence. Relying on Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that self-defence must be assessed from the accused’s perspective during imminent threat, not through “microscopic scrutiny.” It emphasized that actions in self-defence cannot be “weighed in golden scales” and that reasonable apprehension of death suffices to justify defensive force. The judgment reaffirmed that self-preservation is a natural instinct, and one cannot expect arithmetical precision when reacting to a life-threatening assault.