IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Surendra Singh-I, J.
Bablu – Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 1441 of 1994
Decided On : 01-03-2023
Arms Act, 1959 - Section 27 (3) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 307, 34, 320, 325 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 313 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 134 - Intention of causing death - With intention of causing death, they fired on them - Pellets from country-made pistol hit on chest of informant’s father causing injury to him – Nothing emerges in her cross-examination which could shake credibility of her evidence and prove that her evidence is false and unreliable. [Para 31]
Finding of the Court: Oral and documentary evidence produced by prosecution against appellant, charge u/s 325 I.P.C. against appellant, is proved beyond reasonable doubt - Trial court has convicted appellant, only u/s 325 I.P.C. and sentenced him to period of 7 months and 20 days imprisonment which he has undergone during investigation and trial and a fine of Rs.2,000/ - Injured P.W.1 has received firearm or gunshot wound on the front of right side chest 15.5 cm above and at 11.30 o’clock position for umbilicus, she remained admitted in Medical College, Meerut for 18 days - Since no State appeal has been filed against acquitting appellant u/s 307 I.P.C. and that 31 years have lapsed since date of incident and learned A.G.A. for State has not produced any subsequent criminal antecedents of appellant, it is not justified to intervene with his conviction u/s 325 I.P.C. and convict him u/s 307 I.P.C - Considering facts and circumstances of case and nature and gravity of injury received by injured Km. Mamta, ends of justice will be met out if fine imposed is enhanced.
Result: Appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Madan Mohan Chaurasia, learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This criminal appeal has been instituted against the judgement and order dated 24.08.1994 passed by IXth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Sessions Trial No. 698 of 1992, Bablu Vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No. 46 of 1992 u/s 307 I.P.C. & Section 27 (3) of Arms Act, P.S.-Mavana, District-Meerut. There is no criminal appeal filed by the State or informant/injured against acquittal of appellant-accused u/s 307 I.P.C. Thus, the trial court’s order acquitting the accused u/s 307 I.P.C. has become final.
3. By the impugned order, the trial court has convicted the appellant, Bablu u/s 325 I.P.C. and sentenced him for 7 months 20 days imprisonment, the period which he had undergone in judicial custody during investigation and trial and a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulation.
4. According to prosecution case as mentioned in the written report (Ext.Ka.1) presented by the informant, Bablu Giri at P.S.-Mavana, District-Meerut on 30.01.1992, he was going to the shop of Saket to purchase the bundle of bidis. In the way, Raghuvir Singh was beating Amar Singh. The informant stopped there to see the assault made by Raghuvir Singh. Thereupon, Raghuvir landed left fist blow on Bablu Giri. At 4 p.m. while Bablu Giri was returning after purchasing bundle of bidis from the shop, when he reached near the house of Shakir, Raghuvir scolding him, said that you have come here again. Meanwhile, informant’s father, Jaipal Giri reached there. Bablu complained to his father about beating given by Raghuvir. When informant’s father, Jaipal Giri asked Raghuvir the reason for beating his son, Raghuvir started abusing his father. Meanwhile, Raghuvir’s sons, Bablu and Shiv Kumar reached there with country-made pistol (katta) in their hands. With the intention of causing death, they fired on them. The pellets from the country-made pistol hit on the chest of the informant’s father causing injury to him. The pellets also hit Mamta, daughter of Satyapal, who was standing on the roof of her house, causing her injury. Meanwhile, Rajpal, Santa and other persons of the village reached there. They saw appellant firing on the informant and his father. Informant, Bablu Giri, presented written report (Ext.Ka.1) in the police station concerned on the basis of which first information report u/s 307 I.P.C. and Section 27 (3) Arms Act was registered against Raghuvir, Shiv Kumar and Bablu. Its chik report is (Ext.Ka.3). The investigation was done by S.I. Fakire Lal Verma. He prepared the recovery memo (Ext.Ka.2) relating to taking the blood-stained cloth in his possession.
5. The injured Km. Mamta was carried to P.H.C., Mavana where during medical examination, it was found that she had received firearm injury on the right side of her chest. Since her condition was deteriorating fast, no detailed medical examination was done and she was referred to Medical College, Meerut for examination and expert treatment. She was admitted to Medical College, Meerut on 30.01.1992 where her operation was done. Her Bed Head Ticket is (Ext.Ka.5). Injured Jaipal Singh, was medically examined on 30.01.1992 at 8.00 hours at P.H.C. Mavana (Ext.Ka.10). One gunshot wound 1 cm round was found on the left side of outer aspect of chest, 8 cm away from nipple. Charring seen, bleeding present. X-ray was advised.
6. The Investigating Officer, S.I. Fakire Lal Verma, collected plain and blood-stained clothes from the place of occurrence of the injured Km. Mamta and Jaipal, wrapped these clothes in white cloth stitched and sealed it and prepared the memo regarding taking the same in possession (Ext.Ka.2). He then prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence (Ext.Ka.8) and recorded the statements of witnesses and on the basis of evidence collected during investigation, submitted charge-sheet u/s 307
Hori Lal and another Vs. State of U.P.
State of Karnataka Vs. Parashram Kallappa Ghevade
Laxmibai (Dead) through LRs Vs. Bhagwantbura (Dead) through LRs
SupremeToday
Section 134 of Indian Evidence Act : No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for proof of any fact.
Failure to properly examine delay in lodging FIR can be fatal to prosecution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the successful establishment of the charges under sections 324/326/307 IPC against the appellant, based on the evidence presented by the prosecutio....
The need for caution in convicting accused based on the testimonies of injured eyewitnesses, especially in cases of free fights where injuries on the accused are not properly explained.
Attempt to murder – Intention to kill must be apparent from act of accused.
The judgment emphasizes that errors in investigation do not necessarily impact the credibility of eyewitness evidence and that minor contradictions and lapses in investigation do not render the prose....
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.