Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Walmik Baburao Karad, was convicted by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ambejogai, District Beed, in Sessions Case No. 93 of 2005 for offences punishable under Sections 307 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs.7,000/- for the offence under Section 307 IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 353 IPC, with default sentences. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred the present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The prosecution case was that on 21-01-2002, a function for the inauguration of a branch office of the political party 'Bhartiya Yuva Morcha' was held at village Aswalamba, Taluka Parali, District Beed. Police personnel were deployed for bandobast duty. During the function, a person named Shivaji Mundhe made obscene comments towards the leader Dhananjay Mundhe, leading to chaos. The police intervened to control the situation. The appellant, Walmik Karad, who was present, fired a gun at Police Constable Bandu Kadam, causing injuries. The police arrested the appellant and seized the weapon. The trial court, after examining witnesses including the injured police officer and other eyewitnesses, found the appellant guilty. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds that the evidence was unreliable and contradictory. The High Court, after perusing the evidence, held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the injured witness, PC Bandu Kadam, gave a consistent account of the incident, and his testimony was corroborated by other witnesses. The court found that the appellant had the intention to cause death, as he fired at the police officer from close range, and the injury was grievous. The court also held that the appellant assaulted the police officer while he was discharging his duty, constituting an offence under Section 353 IPC. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for attempting to murder a police officer by firing a gun at him during a political rally. The court held that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had the intention to cause death, as he fired at the police officer from close range, and the injury was grievous. The conviction under Section 307 IPC was upheld. (Paras 1-20) B) Criminal Law - Assault on Public Servant - Section 353 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was also convicted for assaulting a police officer while he was discharging his duty. The court found that the appellant used criminal force to deter the police officer from performing his duty, and the evidence of the injured officer and other witnesses was consistent. The conviction under Section 353 IPC was upheld. (Paras 1-20) C) Evidence Law - Credibility of Witnesses - Minor contradictions in the testimony of prosecution witnesses do not affect the core of the prosecution case. The court held that the evidence of the injured witness and other eyewitnesses was trustworthy and sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant. (Paras 15-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Sections 307 and 353 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence under Sections 307 and 353 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Section 307 IPC requires intention or knowledge to cause death
- Section 353 IPC requires assault or criminal force to deter public servant from duty
- conviction can be based on credible testimony of injured witnesses
- minor contradictions in evidence do not discredit prosecution case.
