Back
2016 Supreme(All) 3260
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Umesh Chandra Srivastava, J.
Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar and others - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1487, 498 of 2013
Decided On : 10-06-2016
For the Appellant :- R.B.S. Rathaur, A.K. Srivastava, Manish Pratap Singh and Manish Vikram Singh Chauh, K.S. Rastogi and J.P. Yadav Advocates.
For the Respondent:- J.P. Yadav and K.S. Rastogi, Govt. Advocate.
The court held that the appellants had the intention to kill the first informant and that the injuries caused to the first informant's wife were grievous in nature. The court also held that the punishment awarded to the appellants was adequate.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - [SECTION 307 READ WITH 149 IPC] - [147, 148, 504 IPC] - [1 YEAR IMPRISONMENT AND FINE] - [5 YEARS IMPRISONMENT AND FINE] - [ENHANCEMENT OF PUNISHMENT] - [INTENTION TO KILL] - [FIREARM INJURIES] - [IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED] - [EVIDENCE OF WITNESSES] - [MEDICAL EVIDENCE] - [PUNISHMENT UNDER SECTION 307 IPC] - [PART II OF SECTION 307 IPC] - [ADEQUACY OF PUNISHMENT] - [DISMISSAL OF APPEAL AND REVISION].
Fact of the Case:
Seven appellants, armed with firearms, came to the door of the first informant's house and started hurling abuses. When the first informant and his wife came to the door and objected, appellants Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar and Balram Yadav opened fire at the first informant, intending to kill him. However, the shots misdirected and hit the first informant's wife, causing grievous injuries. The injured was taken to the hospital for treatment and remained admitted for a day.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants had committed the offences under sections 147, 148, 504, and 307 read with section 149 IPC. The court also found that the appellants had the intention to kill the first informant and that the injuries caused to the first informant's wife were grievous in nature.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants had committed the offences under sections 147, 148, 504, and 307 read with section 149 IPC? 2. Whether the appellants had the intention to kill the first informant? 3. Whether the injuries caused to the first informant's wife were grievous in nature? 4. Whether the punishment awarded to the appellants was adequate?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants had committed the offences under sections 147, 148, 504, and 307 read with section 149 IPC. The court relied on the testimony of the eyewitnesses, the medical evidence, and the circumstantial evidence to arrive at this conclusion. 2. The court held that the appellants had the intention to kill the first informant. The court noted that the appellants were armed with firearms and that they had fired multiple shots at the first informant. The court also noted that the appellants had made no attempt to help the first informant's wife after she was injured. 3. The court held that the injuries caused to the first informant's wife were grievous in nature. The court relied on the medical evidence to arrive at this conclusion. The court noted that the first informant's wife had sustained multiple pellet injuries, including injuries to her abdomen. The court also noted that the first informant's wife had been hospitalized for a day. 4. The court held that the punishment awarded to the appellants was adequate. The court noted that the appellants had been sentenced to five years imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 for the offence under section 307 read with section 149 IPC. The court also noted that the appellants had been sentenced to one year imprisonment for the offences under sections 147, 148, and 504 IPC.
Final Decision: The court dismissed both the criminal appeal and the criminal revision. The court upheld the judgment and order of the lower court and directed the appellants to surrender within 15 days to serve the punishment awarded to them.
Umesh Chandra Srivastava, J. –
Criminal appeal no. 1487 of 2013 (Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar & others v. State of U.P.) has been filed against the judgement andorder dated 03.10.2013, passed in Sessions Trial Nos. 116-A and 116 of 2011, (State of U.P. v. Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar and another and State of U.P. v. Brijesh @ Sonu & 4 others respectively), where in the learned Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Sultanpur has convicted and sentenced the appellants Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar, Balram Yadav, Mahendra Yadav, Brijesh @ Sonu, Shiv Bahadur, Narendra Kumar Yadav @ Guddu and Pushpendra Kumar Yadav with one year imprisonment under sections 147, 148, 504 I.P.C. each and five years imprisonment and Rs. 5000/- fine each and in default an additional imprisonment of three months, under section 307 read with section 149 I.P.C.
2. Injured Smt. Reena Yadav and the first informant Sanjay Kumar Yadav of the aforesaid Sessions Trials have filed criminal revision no. 498 of 2013 (Smt. Reena Yadav and another v. State of U.P. And others) for the enhancement of punishment for the offence in question awarded to the aforesaid appellants.
3. Both the aforesaid criminal appeal and criminal revision having been arisen from the same Judgement and order are being disposed of together by a common judgement which is being passed in criminal appeal no. 1487 of 2013.
4. Brief facts of the case are that first informant Sanjay Kumar Yadav submitted a written report dated 10.11.2010 at P.S. Kurebhar, District Sultanpur on 11.11.2010 at 00: 45 A.M. Stating therein that all seven appellants namely Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar, Balram Yadav, Mahendra Yadav, Brijesh @ Sonu, Shiv Bahadur, Narendra Kumar Yadav @ Guddu and Pushpendra Kumar Yadav, armed with fire arms, came to the door of his house in the night of 10.11.2010 at 11: 00 P.M. and started hurling filthy abuses to him. He had further stated in the report that when after hearing abuses he, his wife Smt. Reena Yadav and uncles Hari Prasad Yadav and Jagdeo Prasad Yadav came to the door of his house and objected to appellants from hurling abuses, appellants Krishna Kumar @ Gabbar and Balram Yadav opened fire at him from their country made pistols which misdirected and hit his wife Smt. Reena Yadav causing grievous injuries to her. He had stated that appellants Krishna Kumar and Balram Yadav had shot the fires in furtherance of common object of all appellants to kill him and, after receiving the fire arm injuries his wife Smt. Reena Yadav fell down on the earth where after appellants ran away from the place of occurrence. On this report, a cognisable report under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 504 I.P.C. Was registered against the appellants as case crime No. 699 of 2010, under sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 504, I.P.C. and after investigation charge sheet was filed. The case of the appellants was committed to the Court of Sessions which was ultimately tried in the Court of Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge under sections 149, 148, 504 & 307 read with 149 I.P.C., and the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the strength of evidence available on record found all appellants guilty for the offence they were charged. Consequently, the learned Additional Sessions Judge recorded the judgement of conviction against all seven appellants and convicted them with one year imprisonment under sections 147, 148, 504 I.P.C. each and five years imprisonment and Rs. 5000/- fine each and in default three months additional imprisonment under section 307 read with section 149 I.P.C. impelling appellants to file this criminal appeal.
5. Injured Smt. Reena Yadav and the first informant Sanjay Kumar Yadav being not satisfied with the quantum of punishment awarded to appellants for the offence punishable under section 307 read with section 149 I.P.C., have filed criminal revision with a prayer therein that punishment of appellants should be enhanced to at least ten years rigorous imprisonment under Part-II
