On 24.04.1982, co-accused-Raja Bhaiya Singh and Bhujwal Singh had gone to pluck fruits from mango trees.
On 25.04.1982 at 03:00 P.M., the incident re-occurred when the two co-accused tried to pluck the fruits which again led to exchange of abusive and filthy words.
The gunshots fired by accused No 2 caused the injury to Rajendra Singh (PW-2) and Rani Devi (PW-1’s daughter).
He pointed out that according to the prosecution case, only one gunshot was fired from the gun of accused No 2 but, it is claimed that it resulted into seven injuries on the persons of PW-2 and PW-1’s daughter Rani Devi.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/extension-of-benefit-of-doubt-in-criminal-convictions/
However, some of the findings of the Trial Court support his contention that Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC was applicable.
Therefore, we have no manner 4 of doubt that there was sufficient evidence to indicate that it was the appellant who caused gunshot injury to the deceased which led to his death.
When the appellant visited the house of the deceased, the appellant was carrying his licensed gun.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/vicarious-liability-under-section-34-of-ipc/
In the facts of the case, as narrated above, only after a trifle quarrel over plucking of fruits, the appellant fired a gunshot from the window of the house of the deceased.
Case Title: RAM MANOHAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000760-000760 / 2022
