Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Pritinker Diwaker, Raj Beer Singh, JJ.
Suresh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2086 of 2010
Decided On : 22-04-2019
IPC - Criminal Appeal - Sections 302, 307 - The court discussed the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC, the credibility of witnesses, and the legal principles established in various cases. The court found the accused guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I of IPC and upheld the conviction under Section 307 of IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Suresh, was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC for firing shots at the deceased and injured persons, resulting in the death of the deceased and injuries to others. The prosecution's case was supported by eyewitness accounts and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimony of the eyewitnesses to be reliable and trustworthy, and the presence of the witnesses at the scene of the offence was established. The court concluded that the appellant was responsible for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I of IPC and upheld the conviction under Section 307 of IPC.
Issues: The issues involved the credibility of witnesses, the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC, and the intention of the accused in causing bodily injury likely to cause death.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal principles established in various cases to determine the credibility of witnesses, the application of Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC, and the intention of the accused in causing bodily injury likely to cause death.
Final Decision: The court modified the conviction of the appellant from Section 302 to Section 304 Part I of IPC and upheld the conviction under Section 307 of IPC. The appellant was sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50,000 under Section 304 Part I of IPC, with a direction to pay a portion of the fine to the legal heirs of the deceased and the injured. The appellant was released as he had already served the substantial sentence.
JUDGMENT :
Raj Beer Singh, J.
1. The present criminal appeal arises out of impugned judgment dated 05.03.2010 and order dated 08.03.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Session Trial No. 723/2006, State vs. Suresh, under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC, P.S. Faridpur, District Bareilly, whereby appellant Suresh has been convicted under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302 of IPC and to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 307 of IPC. In default of payment of fine of Rs. 10,000/- he was sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment, while in default of payment fine of Rs. 5000/- he was sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.
2. In this case, name of the deceased is Ram Pravesh, who is brother of complainant Santram. The version of prosecution is that since last 2-3 days of the incident, a boundary related dispute was going on between the complainant's uncle Mahraj Singh and appellant Suresh. On 15.03.2006 at 6:30 p.m. an altercation took place between appellant Suresh and deceased Ram Pravesh and his cousins. In the state of anger, appellant Suresh took out his licensed double barrel gun and fired 4-5 shots at the deceased and injured persons, resultantly Ram Ratan, Guddu alias Gajendra and Rishi Pal sustained injuries, while Ram Pravesh died.
3. On the basis of written tahreer exhibit Ka-1, filed by complainant Sant Ram, the present case was registered on 15.03.2006 at 2:10 hours, under Sections 307 and 302 of IPC against appellant Suresh, vide FIR exhibit Ka-3.
4. The inquest proceedings were conducted by PW-8 Daya Chandra Pundir under the supervision of PW-7 Sukhbir Singh Yadav, S.O. and PS. Faridpur. The inquest report exhibit Ka-11, was prepared and the dead body of the deceased was sealed and sent for post-mortem. Two empty cartridges found at the spot were sealed and taken into possession vide Seizure Memo exhibit Ka-9.
5. The post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased was conducted on 15.03.2006 by PW-6 Dr. Deepak Kumar Saxena. As per post-mortem report, the deceased has sustained following injuries:-
(ii) L.W. ½ x ½ cm muscle deep over Rt. side face 2 cm below Rt. angle of mouth. One metallic pallet removed from the wound.
(iii) Multiple (nine in numbers) small 0.5 x 0.5 cm circulen lacerated wound present skin to chest cavity deep, in front of upper part of chest in area 30 x 27 cm.
Cause of death was stated due to haemorrhage and shock as a result of ante-mortem fire arm injuries.
6. Injured persons were medically examined. As per MLC exhibit Ka-5, the injured Gajendra Singh has sustained following injuries:
(ii) Punctured wound 0.2 cm x 0.2 x 0.5 cm on Rt. side neck front lower side 2.5 cm above medial end of Rt. clavicle, fresh oozing of blood present.
(iii) Abrasion 0.2 x 0.2 cm on front of Rt. forearm 3 cm below Rt. elbow fresh oozing of blood present.
7. As per MLC exhibit Ka-6, injured Ram Ratan has sustained following injuries:
8. As per MLC exhibit Ka-7, Rishipal has sustained following injuries:
9. After completion of the investigation, appellant Suresh was charge sheeted for the offence under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC. Learned trial court has framed charge under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC against the appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
10. In support of its case, prosecution has examined eight witnesses.
11. The appellant-accused was, examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein he has de
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
