SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1978 Supreme(SC) 437

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Jaswant Singh, O. Chinnappa Reddy, JJ.
Salim Zia - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeals Nos. 213, 237 and 238 of 1977
Decided On : 24-11-1978

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Frank Anthony, Sr. Advocate (M/s. B. P. Maheshwari, P. Basu and Suresh Sethi, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. O.P. Ran, Advocate.

Headnote:

Supreme Court Act, 1970 - Section 2 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 34 - Arms Act - Sections 27, 25 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 391, 342 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 - Section 417 - Shots Fired – Injuries - On internal examination of dead body Doctor found all bones of vault and base of skull fractured - He also found not only brain membranes but brain itself lacerated and flowing out of surface injury - He took out pellets and one piece of wad out of brain he also found membrane of abdomen ruptured - According to Doctor death of deceased was due to coma as a result of gun-shot injury on head - On basis of dispersal of shots and tattooing and shape of wounds Doctor opined that aforesaid injuries were not caused from a distance of paces but were caused from a close distance – Held, We have perused impugned judgment with care but do not think that principles laid down by this Court in above mentioned decisions with regard to disposal of acquittal appeals were lost sight of by High Court - Appellants version that injuries observed on his person were result of shots fired by deceased from revolver not having been established and appellant having admitted that he fired two or three shots at deceased High Court was fully justified in reversing trial courts order of acquittal of appellant which was erroneously made by Sessions Judge on basis of surmises and conjectures and convicting him specially when prosecution story that appellant fired at deceased without any justifiable provocation was established to hilt by evidence of a number of prosecution witnesses who even according to Sessions Judge gave a true account of occurrence - Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Jaswant Singh, J.

The above noted three appeals, the first two out of which viz. Criminal Appeal No. 213 of 1977 under Section 2 (a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 and Criminal Appeal No. 237 of 1977 by special leave challenge the reversal of acquittal and conviction of Salim Zia alias Fodi, appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and the last one whereof viz. Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 1977 by special leave which challenges the affirmance of conviction of the appellant under Section 25 of the Arms Act will be disposed of by this judgment as they are all directed against the judgment and order dated April 13, 1977 of the Allahabad High Court.

2. Briefly stated, the case as put forth by the prosecution was that Jaffar Ali, the father of the appellant who migrated to Pakistan and is now a Pakistani national owned a big farm measuring approximately 250 acres in villages Hamid Nagar and Parbatbans within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Bilaspur, District Rampur. Out of the said area of the farm Jaffar Ali had leased out one acre of paddy growing land to Habib, deceased the son of Bandu (P. W. 17) who was a Mistri or Mechanic by profession on 'Ahdiya ghalla batai' basis in lieu of his services for maintaining in working order the hand pumps installed by the former for irrigating the farm. On November 11, 1969, the appellant armed himself with a 12 bore double barrel gun belonging to his uncle, Hamid Ali and accompanied by his younger brothers. Mohd. Jaffar and Salim Jaffar, who have since been acquitted, went to the aforesaid field where the deceased was harvesting and thrashing the crop raised by him and told the later that this time he would be allowed only one third and not one half of the produce. Thereupon the deceased protested asserting that he was entitled to half of the produce as agreed to between him and the appellant's father and that cruelty and injustice should not be perpetrated on him. Annoyed at the audacity of the deceased, the appellant's aforesaid brothers started hurling abuses at the deceased and exhorted the appellant to finish the deceased without being deterred by the consequences which they might have to face. Thereupon, the appellant fired four shots at the deceased from his aforesaid gun as a result whereof the deceased fell down and died on the spot. Intimation of the incident was sent by Azmat Ali (P. W. 1) to Bandu (P. W. 17), the father of the deceased through Muzammil (P. W. 7). On his return after apprising Bandu of the incident, Muzammil was deputed by Azmat Ali to carry the report (Exh. Ka. 1) which he got written by Abrar Hussain (P. W. 11) to the Police Station, Bilaspur where it was lodged at 5.10 P. M. When Muzammil reached the Police Station, he found the appellant already present over there. On receipt of Exhibit Ka. 1, S. I. Narain Singh Negi (P. W. 18) registered a case under Section 302 of the Penal Code and repaired to the scene of occurrence after sending the appellant to the Government Dispensary at Bilaspur for examination of the injuries on his person and recording his statement. On arrival at the place of occurrence, Narain Singh Negi prepared the inquest report and sent the dead body of the deceased for post-mortem examination to the District Hospital at Rampur where Dr. R. K. Misra, M. O. Incharge of the Hospital conducted the autopsy and found the following injuries on the body of the deceased :

    "1. Multiple lacerated gun shot wounds of entry in an area 2" x ½" on front and outer side of right thigh lower part. the wounds are oval and congested and margins are inverted. Size ½" x ½" x depth to wounds of exit near hip.

    2. Multiple lacerated gun-shot wounds of exit in an area 2½" x 2" on back of right thigh lower part and back of right knee joint. The margins of wound are averted. Size ¾" x ½". There is fracture of thigh bone in its lower part in injuries 1 and 2.

    3. Lacerated gun

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top