Summary
The Supreme Court altered convictions arising from fatal celebratory firing from murder and attempted murder to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II and its attempt under Section 308. The evidence showed firing towards a roof, not at the victims, so intention to kill was unproved. Nonetheless, firing a loaded gun near wedding guests carried knowledge of likely fatal injury. The accidental-firing and mere-negligence defence failed.
Issues
- Whether the celebratory firing constituted murder, culpable homicide or mere negligence.
- Whether the conviction for injuries to surviving victims required corresponding alteration.
Provisions considered
- Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, 1860Knowledge of likely fatal injury without proved intention to kill warranted substitution for the murder conviction. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20)
- Section 308, Indian Penal Code, 1860The same distinction required substitution for attempted murder regarding the three injured survivors. (¶¶ 19, 20)
Held
- The appeal was confined to the nature of the offences rather than reopening the appellant’s responsibility for the gunshot deaths. The evidence showed celebratory firing towards the roof and did not establish aiming at the victims or an intention to kill them. (¶¶ 3, 9, 12, 16)
- The suggestion that a child’s ball accidentally triggered the gun was contradicted by eyewitnesses and rejected. The appellant could not reduce the case to negligence under Section 304-A. (¶ 13)
- A loaded gun was fired near assembled guests without reasonable precautions. The appellant was expected to know that pellets could inflict multiple and fatal injuries, establishing culpable-homicide knowledge despite absence of proved intention to kill. On these facts Section 304 Part II, rather than Section 302, applied. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
- For the injuries to the three other victims, the corresponding offence was attempt to commit culpable homicide under Section 308 rather than Section 307. (¶¶ 19, 20)
Result
Appeal partly allowed; Section 302 conviction replaced by Section 304 Part II with ten years’ rigorous imprisonment, and Section 307 conviction altered to Section 308 with its sentence substituted accordingly. Fine imposed by the trial court unchanged.