On January 6, an Allahabad High Court division bench led by Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan upheld the conviction and life sentence given to two men for killing a man with a country-made pistol in 2005. According to the court, the fact that the accused was carrying a firearm weapon at the time of the incident indicated that they intended to cause death or serious injury.

The bench also noted that the nature of the injury and the body part where the injuries were sustained indicated that the Accused-Appellant fired on the deceased with the intent of causing injury likely to result in death or that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to result in death.

As a result, the Court dismissed an appeal filed by the accused challenging the Special Judge (DAA), Agra's October 2010 judgement and order convicting them under Sections 302/34 and 394 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment.

The Court also noted that witnesses in the case had ample opportunity to see the accused at the time of the offence, and there was no possibility of mistaken identity, so the delay in holding the test identification parade may not be considered fatal.

It was argued that appellant no. 1 fired at the deceased in an attempt to save him, and thus the provisions of section 34 IPC would not be invoked in order to convict Appellant-Baba Sindhi under section 302 IPC.

However, in rejecting this argument, the Court stated:

“The criminal offence was attributable or connected or possible outcome of the preconcert/contemporaneous engagement or a manifestation of the mutual consent for robbery and it will fall within the scope and ambit of the act done in furtherance of common intention. The Appellant – Kailash has fired on the deceased in the act of committing robbery and as such co-accused baba Thakur will be liable for such act has been done in furtherance of the common intention of committing an offence and would come within the scope of Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is to be noted that the Appellant-Kailash was carrying a fire arm while committing robbery itself is indicative of intention of the Appellants at the time of committing of crime.”

Case title - Kailash vs. State of U.P along with a connected appeal 
Citation: JAIL APPEAL No. - 7728 of 2010

Read the complete judgment on the following Link: 

 https://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebDownloadJudgmentDocument.do