Satyavir Singh v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The accused was armed with his brother's licensed gun and allegedly fired two shots at the victim, injuring him. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 307 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The First Appellate Court acquitted him, finding the firing accidental. The High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted the accused under Section 307 IPC. The Supreme Court dismissed the appe
What the court decided
[2010] 2 S.C.R. 729
SATYAVIR SINGH
A
v.
STATE OF U.P. (Criminal Appeal No. 295 of 2010)
FEBRUARY 11, 2010
B
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 307 - Accused, armed with licensed gun of his brother, allegedly fired bullet shots at informant's brother and injured him - Trial Court convicted accused uls 307, /PC and u/s 27 of Arms Act - First Appellate Court held that the firing was accidental and acquitted accused of both the offences - High Court reversed the judgment of acquittal by convicting accused uls.307, /PC - Justification of - Held: Justified - The First Appellate Court founded its judgment of acquittal on surmises and suspicion, which were not supported by evidence on record - Statement of eye witnesses, medical evidence and investigation conducted by Investigating Officer clearly show that prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt - The act of firing gun shots at the victim shows that accused had knowledge that by such an act he may even cause death of the victim, though it is a matter of co-incidence that the gun shots did not injure the victim at any of his vital organs - Arms Act, 1959 - s.27.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of acquittal and convicting the accused under Section 307 IPC
Whether the First Appellate Court's finding of accidental firing and benefit of doubt was sustainable in law
Parties & counsel
- appellant
SATYAVIR SINGH
- respondent
STATE OF U.P.
Coram
ALTAMAS KABIR
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decided on
- · February
- Case no.
- 2010 INSC 96
- CNR
- ESCR010004802010
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Raju & Anr. versus State of Haryana
Mrs. Shilpa Aggarwal versus Mr. Aviral Mittal & Anr.
M/S. Godrej Sara Lee Limited versus Reckitt Benckiser Australia Pty. Ltd. and Anr.
R. Ravindra Reddy and Ors. versus H. Ramaiah Reddy and Ors.
M/S. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. & Ors. versus M/S. Super Highway Services & Anr.