IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
GOUTAM BHADURI, J.
Raza @ Raja Pathan S/o Yunus Pathan & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. - Respondent
CRA No. 454 of 2015
Decided On : 10-08-2018
Indian Penal Code,1860 – Section 307/149,148/149 & 506(2) – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 161 - Arms Act - Sections 25 (1) (1- B) (A) and 27 (2) – Attempt to murder – Use of dangerous weapon - Complainant made a report that while he was at his Dhaba, at that time (A2) and his friends had their meal - Subsequently, at the time of payment, they entered into altercation with the manager- Complainant thereafter intervened and (A2) entered into altercation and gave threat that he will teach him a lesson - Subsequently, (A2), (A1), one, (A3), came back armed with Pistol, Gupti, sword and club and entered into Dhaba - Thereafter with the allegation that he has taken more money caught hold of complainant and (A1) took out a pistol and shot fire to complainant which he tried to avert but he sustained bullet injury on his back - At that time, also started assaulting by way of Gupti and sword - Manager of the Dhaba was also assaulted - Thereafter, the appellants fled away - Dehatinalisi was made by Ex. P-12 and thereafter First Information Report was lodged - Whether the appellant has committed the offence, therefore, he deserves benefit of doubt – Held, similar proposition is reiterated in the case of Sukhlal and another V. State of Madhya Pradesh {1998 CRI. L.J. 1366} which lays down that sanction is necessary to prosecute persons under Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and if sanction is not given then in such case, prosecution under Section 25 read with Section 27 of Arms Act cannot be sustained - In a result, the conviction made under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act in absence of sanction to the appellant No.1 is set aside - Now with respect to sentence part, the background under which it happened along with conduct of the accused that after first altercation they came back armed and assaulted victims and the assault was to the extent of using fire arm and incidentally (PW-6) escaped the bullet shot on the vital part on his body - Likewise, the assault was by way of Gupti on the abdomen/chesty of (PW-7) cannot be ignored - In a result, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the sentence part - Accordingly, the same is maintained - In a result, appeal fails as no interference is required in the order only to the modification to above extent that conviction under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act against appellant No.1 is set aside, however, since main conviction under Sections 307 read with Section 149 and separately under Section 148, 149 & 506 (Part - 2) IPC are affirmed and the sentence is also upheld acquittal under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act will not have any significance - Appeal stands disposed of.
1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 23.02.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur in S.T. No.38/2012 whereby the appellant No.1 Raza @ Raja Pathan has been convicted under Sections 307/149 (twice), 148/149 & 506 (Part - 2) IPC & under Sections 25 (1) (1- B) (A) and 27 (2) of Arms Act and has been sentenced for 10 years RI under Section 307/149 IPC and a fine of Rs.500/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 2-2 months RI was ordered for, he has further been sentenced to 1 year R.I. under Section 148/149 IPC and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month RI was ordered for, further has been sentenced to 1 year R.I. under Section 506 (part -2) IPC and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month R.I. was ordered for, he has been sentenced to 1 years R.I. under Section 25 (1) (1-B) (A) of Arms Act and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month R.I. was ordered for and lastly the appellant No.1 has been sentenced to 7 years R.I. under Section 27 (2) of Arms Act and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month R.I. was ordered for. The appellants No.2 & 3 Sharavan Sonker and Lalla Sonker have been convicted under Sections 307/149 (twice), 148/149 & 506 (Part - 2) IPC and both of them have been sentenced for 10 years RI under Section 307/149 IPC and a fine of Rs.500/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 2-2 months RI was ordered for and have further been sentenced to 1 year R.I. under Section 148/149 IPC and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month RI was ordered for and lastly they have been sentenced to 1 year R.I. under Section 506 (part -2) IPC and fine of Rs.100/- and in absence of payment of fine, additional 1 month R.I. was ordered for.
2. Brief facts of this case are that on 05.06.2012, the complainant Rakesh Gupta made a report that on 04.06.2012 at about 9 pm while he was at his Dhaba, at that time Sharavan Sonker (A2) and his friends had their meal. Subsequently, at the time of payment, they entered into altercation with the manager namely Peetamber. The complainant thereafter intervened and Shravan Sonker (A2) entered into altercation and gave threat that he will teach him a lesson. Subsequently, at about 11.30 pm Sharavan Sonker (A2), Raza @ Raja Pathan (A1), one Ravi, Lalla Sonker (A3), Nahid Ansari and Ravindra @ Ravi Banjara came back armed with Pistol, Gupti, sword and club and entered into the Dhaba. Thereafter with the allegation that he has taken more money caught hold of the complainant and Raza @ Raja Pathan (A1) took out a pistol and shot fire to the complainant which he tried to avert but he sustained bullet injury on his back. At that time, Sharavan Sonker and Lalla also started assaulting by way of Gupti and sword. Peetamber, the manager of the Dhaba was also assaulted. Thereafter, the appellants fled away.
3. The dehatinalisi was made by Ex. P-12 and thereafter the First Information Report was lodged vide Ex. P-22. Injured Rakesh Gupta and Peetamber were rushed to hospital and were subjected to medical examination and were admitted to the hospital. Subsequently, the appellants/accused were arrested and the air gun pistol, one sword, clubs and one Gupti were seized vide Ex. P- 7, P-15, P-6 & P-19. The map of the place was prepared and the shirts with blood stains was also recovered. The air gun pistol so seized was sent for examination and the report having been received vide Ex. P-31. It was all sent for FSL. Subsequently, after receipt of the document, the charge-sheet was filed under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 294, 506 B and 25 & 27 of the Arms Act along with Sections 130 (3)/177, 3/181, 146/196 of the Motor Vehicle Act. The charge-sheet was filed before the JMFC, Pendra Road. Subsequently, the case was sent before the Sessions Trial. Charges were framed under Sections 148, 307, 307/149, 323/142
Abdul Sayeed v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Amerika Rai and others v. State of Bihar
Annareddy Sambasiva Reddy v. State of A.P.
Balraje v. State of Maharashtra
Bonkya v. State of Maharashtra
Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan
Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab
Mahendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.
Malkhan Singh v. State of U.P.
Mritunjoy Biswas Versus Pranab ALIAS KUTI BISWAS And Another
Ramlagan Singh v. State of Bihar
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.