Decided on August 22,1979



- (1.) This case has got rather peculiar facts. A police constable entrusted with a rifle to perform duties assigned to him for patrolling, after the duty was over, it is alleged by the prosecution, went to a place in the company of friends an without rhyme or reason, or any apparent motive or pevious enmity between him and the deceased, aimed the rifle at the chest of the deceased, an utter stranger, and in the twinkling of an eye, fired a shot the refrom which went through and through the body of the deceased with the result that a young life, just ushered into the youthful arema was extinguished in no time.
(2.) Mr. A. D. Shah, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant fairly concedes that he is not in a position to challenge the findings of the trial court with regard to the possession of the rifle with the accused at the time of the incident ard with regard to the fatal bullet having emerged from the said rifle and having perced through the chest of the deceased causing his death. In view of the volunitus evidence of a number of witnesses, including documentary evidence on record, with regard to the patrolling duty assigned to the accused from 13th May, 1978 onwards at Ranavav railway track; his being entrusted with the rifle from which the gunshot was fired and his being found with the rifle in police unifrom with his two companions at the scene of the incident on the night 18th and morning of 19th May, 1978 and the gunsnot from the very rifle having caused the death of the deceased, the bullet having pierced through and through from his chest and back, there is no doubt in our mind that the learned Judge was fully justified wiih regard to the findings arrived at by him in this connection.
(3.) But Mr Snah attacks the under of the trial court on the ground that inspite of sufficient material on record, the learned Judge failed to apperciate the evidence in proper perspctive and in arriving at the conclusion which is inescapapable in view of the evidence on record, that the act of the accused was not an intentional one and that the bullet from the rifle carried by the accused emerged out of the rifle accidentally killing the deceased. At the most further submits Mr. Shah, offence if any. committed by the accused would be one punishable under section 304-A or 304-II of the I, P. Code. Paras 8 to 13 Not Reportable.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.