SANTOSH KORI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of CrPC has been filed against the judgment and sentence dated 2/11/2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Datia in ST No. 52/2004 by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of IPC and under Section 25 (1-B) (a) read with Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 4 years and rigorous imprisonment of 1 year respectively and the sentences were directed to run separately.

(2.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present appeal in short are that on 9/2/2004 at about 15:40, injured Ramchandra Sahu lodged a FIR against the appellant alleging that the complainant has a cycle repairing shop and at about 3:30 pm he was sitting in the shop. At that time, the appellant fired a gunshot on the complainant with an intention to kill him, which landed on his back. While appellant Santosh was trying to reload the country-made pistol, the complainant had scuffle with him and tried to snatch .315 bore pistol from the appellant. At that time, Siya Saran and Rajiv, who are the Constables posted in Police Station Civil Lines, District Datia also came there. The appellant was caught on the spot. Rajiv snatched the country-made pistol from the hand of appellant Santosh and he has been brought to the police station. It is further submitted that the incident has been witnessed by Deepak, Siya Saran Yadav, Sanjay Sahu, Babu Khan and Meharban Singh. It was further alleged that since the complainant was getting a shop constructed by the side of his cycle repairing shop and initially he had a talk with the appellant for the said purpose, but since the appellant was demanding more money, therefore, instead of giving the contract to the appellant, the complainant had given the contract to another person, as a result of which, the appellant had a grudge against him. On this complaint, the police registered the offence against the appellant under Section 307 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. Complainant Ramchandra Sahu was sent for medical examination. The country-made pistol was seized. The sanction for prosecution under Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act was obtained and, after completing the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet for offence under Section 307 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. The trial Court, by order dated 9/7/2004, framed charge under Section 307 of IPC and Section 25 (1-B) (a) read with Section 27 of Arms Act.

(3.) The appellant abjured his guilt and pleaded not guilty.