AHSAN versus STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [2017] 7 S.C.R. 658 · Decided: 29-08-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.K. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 7 S.C.R. 658 
A 
AHSAN 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. 
B 
·(Criminal Appeal No. 1525 of2017) 
AUGUST29,2017 
fR.K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.J 
C 
Penal Code, 1860- ss.452, 307134, 504, 316134 -Prosecution 
D 
E 
case was that complainant witnessed that appellant and other 
accused armed with the country made pistols entered the house of 
his uncle and abused members of family including his pregnant 
niece and shot fire from their respective pistols with intention of 
killing them -
Conviction ulss.452, 307134, 504, 316134 by trial 
court and life imprisonment - High Court affirmed the same -
Conviction upheld by Supreme Court - instant appeal challenging 
correctness of quantum of sentence - Held: The gunshot injury 
caused by the appellant to the victim was grievous in nature, the 
bullet injury was caused in the head which was the most delicate 
and vital part of the body; the facts of the case satisfied the 
ingredients of the first part of s.307, namely, all the three accused 
which included the appellant had gone lo the house of victim with a 
common intention to kill the members of.family and in order to 
accomplish the intention, each accused targeted one member of the 
F family present in the room which resulted in death of a stillborn 
child of niece, who was hit by gunshot in her abdomen and other 
two members suffered serious gunshot injuries though both survived 
- While sentencing the accused, the Court is required to take into 
account several factors arising in the case, such as the nature of 
offence committed, the manner in which it was committed, its gravity, 
G the motive behind the commission of the offence, nature of injuries 
sustained by the victim, whether the injuries sustained were simple 
or grievous in nature, weapons used for commission of offence and 
any other extenuating circumstances if any - Considering these 
factors, no case made out for interference with quantum of 
H punishment in the instant case. 
658 
AHSAN v. STATE OF U.P. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. Section 307 provides three punishments for three 
classes of nature of the cases. One class of cases, which falls in 
first part of the Section, prescribes a term "which may extend to 
ten years and fine", second class of cases, which falls in the second 
part of the Section, prescribes either "imprisonment for life" or 
"such punishment, which is prescribed in first part" and the third 
class of cases is when any person offending under Section ~07 
IPC is under sentence of imprisonment for life, causes hurt,. be 
punished with "death". So far as the punishment prescribed in 
first part of the Section is concerned, it applies to the cases where 
a person does any act with an intention or knowledge and under 
any circumstances, caused death. So far as the punishment 
prescribed in second part is concerned, it applies to the cases 
where the person while committing the act falling in first part, 
causes "hurt" to any person. The instant case covers class of 
cases falling under part one and two. (Paras 19, 20, 22, 23( (663-
G, H; 664-A-CI 
2. The two courts below did not commit any error in 
exercising their judicial discretion in the light of facts found proved 
while awarding life imprisonment to the appellant. It is for the 
reasons that firstly, the facts of the case squarely fall in the second 
part of Section 307 IPC; secondly, gunshot injury caused by the 
appellant to the victim-S was grievous in nature, thirdly, the bullet 
injury was caused in the head which was the most delicate and 
vital part of the body; fourthly, the facts of the case satisfied the 
ingredients of the first part of Section 307 IPC, namely, all the 
three accused which included the appellant had gone to the house 
of victim-S with a common intention to kill the members of family 
and in order to accomplish the intention, each accused targeted 
one member of the family present in the room which resulted in 
death of a stillborn child of victim-R, who was hit by gunshot in 
. her abdomen and other two members suffered serious gunshot 
injuries though both survived. (Paras 23, 241 (664-D-F] 
659 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
3. While sentencing the accused, the Court is required to 
take into account several factors arising in the case, such as the 
nature of offence committed, the manner in which it was 
committed, its gravity, the motive behind the commission of the 
offence, nature of injuries sustained by the victim, whether the · H 
66

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.