Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KAUSHAL JAYENDRA THAKER, GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, JJ.
Nand Kishore @ Nagpal - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4159 of 2012
Decided On : 20-01-2021
Judgment - State Vs. Nand Kishore @ Nagpal - Sections 307, 326 I.P.C., Sections 25/27 Arms Act - The court discussed the provisions of Section 307 and 326 I.P.C., and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, and their interpretation in the context of the injuries sustained by the victim and the evidence presented. The court modified the punishment under Section 326 I.P.C. and Section 307 I.P.C. based on the nature of injuries and the weapon used.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the Judgment and order passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge in a case involving charges under Sections 307, 326 I.P.C. and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. The case arose from an incident where the appellant fired a gun shot from a country made pistol, injuring the victim, and was subsequently convicted and sentenced by the trial court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was involved in the incident and was convicted under Sections 307 and 326 I.P.C., and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. The court modified the punishment under Section 326 I.P.C. and Section 307 I.P.C. based on the nature of injuries and the weapon used.
Issues: The issues included the nature and cause of the victim's injuries, the involvement of the appellant in the incident, and the appropriate punishment under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the medical evidence, witness testimonies, and the nature of injuries to determine the appellant's culpability and the appropriate punishment under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.
Final Decision: The appeals were partly allowed, and the punishment under Section 326 I.P.C. and Section 307 I.P.C. was modified based on the nature of injuries and the weapon used. The appellant was ordered to be released from jail if not required in any other case.
JUDGMENT :
1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the Judgment and order 24.9.2012 passed by court of Additional Sessions Judge (Ex-Cadre), Rampur in Sessions Trial No. 304 of 2011, State Vs. Nand Kishore @ Nagpal arising out of Case Crime No. 332 of 2011 under Sections 307, 326 I.P.C. heard with Sessions Trial No. 305 of 2011, State Vs. Nand Kishore @ Nagpal, arising out of Case Crime No. 362 of 2011 under Sections 25/27 Arms Act, Police Station Shahjad Nagar, District Rampur.
2. The brief facts which led to the litigation and whereby the State had to start investigation are that on 19.3.2011, informant Dal Chand gave a written complaint to the Station House Officer, Police Station Shahjad Nagar stating therin that his son Rameshwar injured on the date of incident, i.e., 19.3.2011 was going to ply van on the kanta of one Buddhi Lal after having his meal. When he reached at the shopping place known as Kamora Bazar, he met Lekhpal @ Sapera who was having illicit relation with one woman of easy virtue, namely, Savitri had altercation with son of the complainant, at 7 pm, with a view to do away the injured, the accused fired one gun shot from country made pistol which injured Rameshwar. On hearing hue and cry, informant, Natthu Lal and Ram Kishore converged to the place of occurrence on which accused fled with the country made pistol. This gave rise to the investigation by the police for the commission of offence and for using and having arms which was prohibited under the Arms Act. The police registered aforementioned case crime numbers under the relevant sections of I.P.C. and also under Arms Act after recovery of 12 bore country made pistol.
3. After the investigation was over, charge sheet was filed against the accused. The case being exclusively triable by the court of sessions, the same was committed to the Sessions court. The accused was read over the charges, who pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried.
4. The injured was taken to the hospital, who had suffered two major injuries, which were as follows:-
Injury No.1:-Contused wound 2cmx 1.05 cm on left side of neck below 5 cm from ear towards behind.
Injury No.2:- Contused wound 1.05x 1.00 cm above the left eye.
5. These two injuries were certified by the doctor P.W.4 Sri Mohd. Ahmad who opined that they appeared to be caused by firearms and testified that they were caused by way of firing by a country made pistol recovered from appellant.
6. The prosecution so as to bring home the charges examined eight witnesses, who are as under:-
| 1. | Dalchandra | P.W.1 |
| 2. | Rameshwar | P.W.2 |
| 3. | Ram Kishore | P.W.3 |
| 4. | Dr. Mohd. Ahmad | P.W. 4 |
| 5. | Constable Mohd. Taukir | P.W. 5 |
| 6. | Dr. Vipul Kumar | P.W. 6 |
| 7. | Dr. Nishant Gupta | P.W.7 |
| 8. | Dr. Akhil Agrawal | P.W.8 |
7. In support of the ocular version of the witnesses, following documents were produced and contents were proved by leading evidence:
| 1. | Written Report | Ext. Ka-1 |
| 2. | Medical Report | Ext. Ka-2 |
| 3. | Chik | Ext. Ka-3 |
| 4. | Nakal Rapat | Ext. Ka-4 |
| 5. | Chik F.I.R. | Ext. Ka-5 |
| 6. | Nakal Rapat | Ext. Ka-6 |
| 7. | Report of injured | Ext. Ka-7 |
| 8. | Operation Note | Ext. Ka-8 |
| 9. | Information at Police Station Prem Nagar | Ext. Ka-9 |
| 10. | Reference Slip | Ext. Ka-10 |
| 11. | X-ray Slip | Ext. Ka-11 |
| 12. | Prescription Receipt | Ext. Ka-12 |
| 13. | Blood Bank Receipt | Ext. Ka-13 |
| 14. | Discharge Slip | Ext. Ka-14 |
| 15. | Pathology Report | Ext. Ka-15 |
| 16. | Report of Patient | Ext. Ka-16 |
| 17. | Consent l | |
AI
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
