Summary
Vasudev’s convictions arose from alleged firing at police and recovery of an unlicensed gun. The Court found that his participation in attempted murder and use of the weapon were not proved beyond reasonable doubt. The eyewitness and forensic evidence did not establish the prosecution account, and the defence raised reasonable doubt. Convictions under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act were set aside. The unlicensed-possession conviction remained, its sentence already served, and release was directed.
Issues
- Whether the evidence proved the appellant’s participation and requisite intention or knowledge for attempted murder.
- Whether use of the recovered gun was proved and which convictions should remain.
Provisions considered
- Sections 307 and 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860The prosecution had to prove the alleged act and requisite intention or knowledge beyond reasonable doubt; the evidence did not establish the appellant’s guilt on that basis. (¶ 7-8)
Held
- No prosecution witness saw the appellant fire at police with the requisite intention or knowledge. One witness stated that firing was toward the hill rather than the police party. The prosecution failed to establish the attempted-murder charge beyond reasonable doubt. (¶ 7)
- Arrest and seizure proceedings were prepared at the police station, independent witnesses did not support the account, and the failure to involve an available person in the seizure or arrest was unexplained. These circumstances made the appellant’s defence plausible and created reasonable doubt. (¶ 7)
- The forensic report did not establish firing from the recovered twelve-bore gun: the right barrel could not fire and the empty cartridges did not match firing from the left barrel. Consequently, the weapon-use conviction under Section 27 Arms Act was unsustainable. (¶ 7)
- The appeal was partly allowed and the appellant acquitted of Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act. Conviction under Section 25(1B)(a) Arms Act remained, but its sentence had already been served. Release forthwith was ordered unless required in another case. (¶ 8-9)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act convictions set aside; Section 25(1B)(a) conviction retained with sentence already served. Release forthwith unless required in another case.