VASANT VITHU JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When member of a disciplined force like police force is accused of having shot his colleague with a gun, it naturally raises eyebrows and the case at hand is one such case. The victim Vilas (P.W. 2) was a relative of the accused.

(2.) According to the prosecution, over a petty family matter, accused took exception and on 18-7-1983 fired a gun from a very close range aiming at the victim lying on a cot. Luckily, the shot did not hit the victim, it hit springs of the cot, the bullet broke into pieces and the splinters entered into his leg. Information was lodged with the police, investigation was undertaken and charge-sheet was filed for alleged commission of offence punishable under S. 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC') and S. 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (for short "the Arms Act").

(3.) The trial Court placing reliance on the evidence of the witnesses including victim found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under S. 324, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo RI for one year. Similar sentence was imposed for the offence under the Arms Act. It was held that the factual background did not warrant conviction under S. 307, I.P.C. The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal questioning acquittal of charge under S. 307, I.P.C. while the accused questioned the conviction. Both the appeals were heard together by the Division Bench which by the impugned judgment held that case under S. 307 was clearly made out, and the trial Court was not justified in holding that the accused was guilty of offence punishable under S. 324, I.P.C. Taking into account the fact that the accused was supposed to be a guardian of law on the date of the occurrence and at a public place i.e. the guard room in the District Head Police Headquarters, he took law in his hands, custodial sentence of 10 years R.I. was imposed. The sentence under the Arms Act was maintained. The appeal filed by the accused was dismissed.