ASHARAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant Asharam has been convicted under Section 337 I. P. C. and sentenced to one month's R. I. THE brief facts are these: On December 30, 1977 at about 2-30 p. m. the applicant was sitting in the Tahsil campus in the Varandah of a hotel with the licenced gun of Janki Prasad Khare which Janki Prasad Khare had entrusted to him while he himself went for some work to the court room. THE victim Har Psasad was sitting nearby when all of a sudden the gun went off. THE shot hit the roof and the splinters from the plaster and recoiling pellets hit Har Prasad causing four abrasions on his cheek, shoulder blade and back. THEse injuries were 2 cm. in diameter and one showed a foreign body under it.

(2.) THE only question in revision is whether the applicant can be said to have acted so rashly and negligently as to endanger the personal safety of others. THE record shows that the testimony of the injured is that the gun was pointing roof wards and all of a sudden it went off but he had no idea how it went off. THEre is no allegation that the applicant was fiddling with the trigger or even the gun. What is even more important is that there is no allegation that the applicant knew that the gun was loaded. Undisputedly, it was an accident but there is nothing which can indicate any negligence of the applicant. THE gun was not pointed in the direction of any person which is the most important point to remember when handling a gun. THE contingency of the gun going off and the shot hitting the roof and the splinters causing injuries is in my view so remote that the applicant can hardly be ascribed the knowledge of it and without knowledge or presumed knowledge of the consequences there cannot be said to be any negligence or omission of case to avoid those consequences. THE contention that the offence under Section 337 I. P. C. has not been made out must, in these circumstances, be upheld.