ARVIND KUMAR Vs. STATE OF NCT, DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellant­accused has taken an exception to the order of his conviction passed by the Sessions Court for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "IPC"). The learned Sessions Judge held that the case of the appellant­accused was covered by "thirdly" in Sec. 300 of IPC. The learned Sessions Judge held that the appellant­accused has failed to bring the case within the protective umbrella of the exception 4 to Sec. 300 of IPC. By the impugned judgment of the High Court, the conviction of the appellant has been confirmed. The Trial Court sentenced the appellant to undergo a life sentence. By the time the appellant was released on bail by this Court by the order dtd. 27/11/2017, the appellant had undergone incarceration for a period of about 8 years and 11 months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that one Shashi Bala (PW­12) who was a Sub­inspector of Police was posted as a Duty Officer in I.P. Estate Police Station, Delhi on 28/12/1994. One constable Mohd. Rashid (the deceased) was on duty as "Munshi­Roznamacha". At about 5.45 pm, the deceased came to the reporting room and started talking on the official telephone of the Police Station. After noticing that the deceased was talking on the phone for about 5 to 7 minutes, Shashi Bala (PW­12) advised him not to keep the official telephone engaged as the Police Station may receive some urgent calls. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased did not pay heed to the advice of PW­12. The appellant was posted as a guard at the Police Station. The appellant was carrying a Semi­Automatic Fire (SAF) - carbine. PW­12 Shashi Bala, around 5.55 pm, requested the appellant to ask the deceased to desist from continuing with his conversation on the telephone. Therefore, the appellant entered the duty room where the deceased was sitting and talking on the phone. The appellant put his hand on the shoulder of the deceased and advised him to end the call.

(3.) Initially, based on a statement of Shashi Bala (PW­12), an offence under Sec. 304A was registered against the appellant. On the next day of the incident, the father of the deceased submitted a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police and to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Based on the said complaints, the investigation was transferred to the Crime Branch. According to the prosecution, the opinion of the expert ruled out any possibility of accidental fire from SAF carbine. It was also revealed by the father of the deceased that prior to the incident, the deceased had caught the accused and Shashi Bala in objectionable condition.