IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar, J.
Sheru Alias Lulla – Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 13197 of 2024
Decided On : 27-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction details of sheru alias lulla (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments raised regarding the conviction (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. evidence and reliability in conviction (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. prosecution's burden regarding firearm recovery (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 22) |
| 5. conclusion on sentencing and judgment adherence (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar, J.
This criminal appeal u/S 415 of Bhartiya Nagarik Surkasha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS,2023’, hereinafter) is filed assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.11.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jawra, Distt. Ratlam in S.T. No. 07/2023 whereby the appellant – Sheru alias Lulla was convicted for the offence punishable u/S 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 06 months and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation for rigorous imprisonment of 01 month on non-payment of fine. Sheru was also convicted for offence punishable u/S 25(1-B)(a) of the ARMS ACT ,1959 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03 Years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation for rigorous imprisonment of 06 months. Sheru was further convicted for offence punishable u/S 27 of ARMS ACT ,1959 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 05 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation for rigorous imprisonment of 06 months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. For the sake of convenience appellant – Sheru alias Lulla shall be referred to as "accused" hereinafter.
2. The exposition of facts giving rise to present appeal are as under:
Fareed S/o Aslam had an altercation with Sheru alias Lulla over fetching of water from the Government Water Tap. Sheru had assaulted Farid, therefore matter was reported to P.S. Jawra. Sheru was pressurizing for compromise in the matter. On 29.11.2022, around 7:30 in the evening, Sheru fired on Aslam by his pistol. Aslam sustained bullet injury on his right foot. Aslam was taken to Civil Hospital, Jawra. P.S. Jawra registered FIR at Crime No. 398/2022. The medico legal examination of Aslam was conducted. On completion of investigation final report was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jawra. Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 15.02.2023.
3. Learned JMFC, Jawra framed charges for offence punishable u/S 307 of IPC and Section 25(1-B)(a) of ARMS ACT and Section 27 of ARMS ACT , 1959 against accused Sheru alias Lulla and the offence punishable u/S 307 r/W 34 of IPC and Section 25(1-B)(c) of ARMS ACT against Bhura alias Ameen. On completion of trial, after hearing both the parties, learned trial Court acquitted the co-accused Bhura alias Ameen from charges of offence punishable u/S 307 r/W 34 of IPC and Section 25(1-B) (c) of the ARMS ACT . Learned trial Court acquitted co-accused Bhura alias Ameen from charges of offence punishable u/S 307 r/W 34 of IPC and Section 25(1-B)(c) of the ARMS ACT . Learned trial Court acquitted the accused – Sheru alias Lulla from the charges punishable u/S 307 of IPC . However, convicted him for Section 34 of IPC and Section 25(1-B)(a) and 27 of the ARMS ACT and sentenced him for Rigorous imprisonment and fine as stated in para 1 of the judgment.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence present appeal is filed on the following grounds:
1. The gun allegedly recovered at the instance of appellant/accused was recovered from an open place. There was no finger print on it. Proper sealing and custody of the article was not proved.
2. The evidence of witnesses is self-contradictory. Learned trial Court committed error in relying on their statements.
3. The Investigation was tainted and partial.
On these grounds, it is prayed that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence be set aside and appellant be acquitted.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that the app
The court reduced the appellant's sentence for illegal possession of a firearm due to its harshness while affirming the conviction for assault under IPC, emphasizing the need for correct punitive mea....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; failure to adhere to legal standards and evidentiary requirements can result in acquittal.
The failure to properly seal and document seized items raises reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court emphasized the necessity of credible witness identification and the examination of all relevant evidence in criminal proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for independent witnesses and corroborating evidence in cases involving the recovery of weapons and confessional statements made in....
The prosecution's failure to prove seizure of arms and lack of valid sanction for prosecution under the Arms Act results in acquittal due to reasonable doubt.
Manufacture, sale of prohibited arms and ammunition - Conviction confirmed - As per Section 3(1) no person shall acquire, have in his possession, or carry any firearm or ammunition unless he holds a ....
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.