IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
Abrar - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 4288 of 2018
Decided on : 01-11-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of charges and evidence presented (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court’s analysis of the evidence and determination of reasonable doubt. (Para 2 , 5) |
| 3. arguments presented by both sides regarding the evidence and witness credibility. (Para 6) |
| 4. arguments regarding witness credibility and enmity (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's analysis of prosecution evidence (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. doubts cast on firearm recovery implications (Para 12) |
| 7. affirmation of conviction with modified sentencing (Para 13 , 15) |
| 8. final order and compliance instructions (Para 14 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.
1. Instant appeal arises out of the judgement and order dated 30.5.2018 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Fatehpur in S.T. No. 291 of 2015 ( State vs. Abrar ) arising out of Case Crime No.245 of 2015, under Section 3 07 IPC, Police Station Bindki, District Fatehpur as well as S.T. No.292 of 2015, under Section 3 /25 ARMS ACT , arising out of Crime No. 250 of 2015, P.S. Bindki, District - Fatehpur, convicting the appellant under Sections 3 07) IPC and Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT and sentencing him as under:
(ii) under Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs.1,000/- in default thereof he has to undergo one month additional imprisonment. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
2. Heard Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Deepak Kapoor, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The factual matrix of the case in brief relevant for the present appeal are that the de-facto complainant Rukhsana lodged an FIR at police station concerned on 18.7.2015 at 9:00 hours, on the basis of written report stating therein that his father Rashid had refused to give fish from his pond to accused Abrar on his demand and for that reason, the accused fired a shot at the fater of the informant on 18.7.2015 at 7:00 hours in front of the house of Ahmad. He rushed his father to Government Hospital, Bindki with assistance of Gram Pradhan and co-villagers. His father was referred to Kanpur for treatment. FIR was lodged under Section 3 07 IPC at police station concerned. On the basis of secret information, the Investigating Officer arrested the accused during the course of investigation on 22.7.2015 at 12:50 hours near the trisection of Sarkandi, main road and recovered a countrymade pistol of .315 bore, one live cartridge and one empty shell of .315 bore. The Investigating Officer of case under Section 3 07 IPC prepared an arrest and recovery memo and got the signature of the accused and police witnesses thereon. The accused has confessed before police team that he used this countrymade pistol (tamancha) while firing a shot on Rashid on 18.7.2015 at 7:00 AM but his life was saved. He also stated that the empty shell is of the cartridge, which was used in commission of offence of attempt to murder. The local witnesses declined to stand as a witness for personal reasons. An FIR under Section 3 /25 of ARMS ACT was also lodged on the basis of recovery memo prepared by S.I. Krishna Kumar Mishra, who is Investigating Officer of case under Section 3 07 IPC on 22.5.2015 at 14:20 hours. The injured Hazi Rashid was admitted in Chandni Hospital, Private Ltd., Arya Nagar, Kanpur for treatment on 18.7.2015 at 9:40 AM having received gunshot injury and was discharged on 11.8.2015, as revealed from discharge slip of the hospital, which is Ex.Ka-12. He was also operated in said hospital on 18.7.2015, as he received gunshot injury on right chest wall. The operation papers were proved by concerned Doctor as Ex.Ka-13 and Ka-14. The countrymade pistol, one live cartridge and one empty cartridge shell were sent for ballistic examination to FSL, UP, Lucknow.
The repor
The court affirmed conviction for attempted murder while reducing the sentence due to mitigating circumstances, highlighting scrutiny of evidence in violent crime cases and the need for direct corrob....
The conviction for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC was upheld based on eyewitness accounts, while the charge under the Arms Act was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
Minor injuries do not negate culpability for attempt to commit murder; intention inferred from actions and circumstances surrounding the act.
Point of Law : Conviction on the basis of statements of two police officials alone is not sustainable.
Attempt to murder – Intention to kill must be apparent from act of accused.
Prosecution must provide corroborative evidence, especially in firearm offences; mere accusations without substantiating proof cannot sustain a conviction.
Conviction under Section 307 IPC reversed due to hostile corroborative witness, inconsistencies between injured witness testimony and FIR, unexplained FIR delay despite prior police information, abse....
Acquittal upheld where prosecution fails to prove intent to commit murder beyond reasonable doubt.
The refusal of the accused to undergo TIP, the recovery of the weapon of offence, and the consistent testimony of eyewitnesses can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Point of Law : Obviously, enmity was existing between both the sides and some altercation is stated to have taken place which has been trid to be coloured differently by the prosecution witnesses.
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.