'Guns approved for self-protection can't be used for celebratory firing': SC expresses concern about growing incidents - Synopsis
Dilpreet Singh 24 Mar 2020

After sentencing an accused for ten years of rigorous imprisonment for killing two people in a celebrating firing, the Supreme Court expressed its concern over the growing cases of celebratory firings. The bench led by CJI SA Bobde thus observed:

"Incidents of celebratory firing are regretfully rising, for they are seen as a status symbol. A gun licensed for self protection or safety and security of crops and cattle cannot be fired in celebratory events, it being a potential cause of fatal accidents. Such like misuse of fire arms convert a happy event to a pall of gloom."

Bhagwan Singh had been accused of murder and sentenced by the High Court for life imprisonment. It was argued in his appeal before the Supreme Court that it was a case of celebratory firing that unfortunately caused two people to die accidentally and three others to be hurt. It was further argued that it is not 'culpable homicide' as he had no idea that shooting the roof was likely to cause death.

The bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice BR Gavai partly allowed the appeals, and disagreed with the Trial Court and the High Court further ruled that the shooting from the gun pointed to the roof was as bad as firing to a crowd of people and he must have known that his guns were so dangerous as to cause death. The bench stated:

"It was an unfortunate case of misfiring. The appellant of course cannot absolve himself of the conclusion that he carried a loaded gun at a crowded place where his own guests had gathered to attend the marriage ceremony. He did not take any reasonable safety measures like to fire the shot in the air or towards the sky, rather he invited full risk and aimed the gun towards the roof and fired the shot. He was expected to know that pellets could cause multiple gunshot injuries to the nearby persons even if a single shot was fired. The appellant is, thus, guilty of an act, the likely consequences of which including causing fatal injuries to the persons being in a close circuit, are attributable to him. The offence committed by the appellant, thus, would amount to 'culpable homicide' within the meaning of Section 299, though punishable under Section 304 Part 2 of the IPC."

Consequently, the bench sentenced him to ten years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 304.

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com