PURA RAM Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

(2.) The appellants have been convicted of the offence u/Sec. 307 Penal Code and sentenced to 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000.00 in defaults of payment of fine to further under go 2 months rigorous imprisonment and u/Sec. 27 Arms Act, sentenced to a years rigorous imprisonment. Both these sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) It may be stated that the case was originally registered u/Sec. 336, 337 and 338 Penal Code and challan was presented under these section. The learned Magistrate, however, took cognisance u/Sec. 307 Penal Code on complaint. Four person namely; Ram Chandra, Jisukh, Hari Ram and Tulsi sustained pallet wounds. Tulsi is the niece of the appellant Vazira and Ram Chandra is also related to Vazira being his sisters son. There was no reason for the appellants to fire at them. This shows that it was not intentional firing by the appellants and the prosecution case from the beginning was that the shots were fired negligently by the appellants. Looking to the case in the totality, in my opinion, the appellants cannot be held guilty of the offence u/Sec. 307 Penal Code one of the insured has sustained grievous injury but who is the author of that injury; is not known. Thus, the appellants can only be held guilty u/Sec. 337. Penal Code and 27 Arms Act. The appellants are in custody, since 14-10.1986. It would be proper to reduce the sentence to the period of their custody.