LexSAGAYAM versus STATE OF KARNATAKA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
• SAGAYAM v. STATE OF KARNATAKA APRIL 26, 2000 [S. SAGHIR AHMAD ANDS. RAJENDRA BABU, JJ.] Tenvrist and Disruptii•e Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 : Ss. 3 and 5-'Termrist act'-What is-Accused in order to spread fear in the minds of people and for exto11ing money, storing lethal weapons in his house-Confessional statement-Conviction and sentence by Designated Cow1 Validity o.f Held, to constitute an act to be a 'tenvrist act' it has to be committed A B c with the dominant intention (i) f.:J overawe the Govemment; or (ii) to strike termr in the people, or (iii) to alienate any section of the people; or (iv) to adversely affect the hmmony amongst d~fferent sections of the people-Acts attributed to the accused or the confessional Statement do not disclose commis- D sion of any 'tenvrist act'-Conviction set aside. Penal Code, 1860-S. 307. Attempt to commit murder-Held, has to be distinguishedfrom an intent to commit it or preparation to commit it. E Attempt to commit murder-Accused t1ying to assault a police officer on search-Officer escaping the assault without any injury-Held, would not amount to attempt to commit murde1: W01ili & Phrases : 'Te1mrist act'-Meaning and scope o.f in the context of S. 3(1) o.f the Te1mrist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987. Appellant was prosecuted for offences under Sections 3 and 5 of Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. The prosecution case was that appellant in order to spread fear in the minds of the people and for extorting money and valuables, stored lethal weapons in his house. When PW 2 (ASI) went to his house for search, appellant unsuccessfully tried to assault him. The Designated Court relying upon the evidence of Police 565 F G H 566 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] 3 S.C.R. A Officers and confessional statement made by appellant under Exh. P-7 convicted and sentenced him. Hence the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1.1. The ingredients of none of the section, arising under B Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 or in the Penal Code have been established against the appellant. Thus, conviction and sentence imposed by the Designated Court is set aise. [571-D] c D E F G 1.2. Under S. 3(1) of the TADA Act in order to constitute an act to be a 'terrorist act' it should have been committed with the dominant intention to, (i) overawe the Government as by law established; or (ii) to strike terror in the people or any section of the people; or (iii) to alienate any section of the people; or (iv) to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people. [568-E-F] In the instant case, if statements made by the witnesses are examined it is clear that it is only to the effect of recovering certain arms and materials which could be used as lethal weapons, and vague allegations of extortion or robbery. Though statements have been made that the appel- lant used to extract money from public by wielding a knife so as to threaten people an is involved in many cases of other illegal activities by itself could not lead to the conclusion that he has committed acts arising under Section 3 of the Act. Mere storing of certain weapons such as cycle chain, chopper would not also lead to the conclusion that the accused has committed these offences. [569-F -G] Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi v. JitendraBhimraj Bijjaya, [1990] 4 SCC 76 and Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharatra, [1994) 4 SCC 602, relied on. 2. The confessional statement made by the appellant do not disclose commission of any 'terrorist act' under Section 3(1) of the Act. Thus, the H Designated Court was not justified in relying upo1,1 the confessional state- ment for conviction of the appellant. [568-H] SAGA YAM v. STATE [RAJENDRA BABU, J.] 567 3.1. To justify conviction under Section 307 IPC, it is not essential that bodily injury capable of causing death should have been inflicted. An attempt in order to be criminal need not be the penultimate act fore-boding death. It is sufficient in law if there is present an intent coupled with some overt act in execution thereof, such act being proximate to the crime intended and if the attempt bas gone so far that it would have been complete but for the extraneous intervention which frustrated its consum- mation. There are different stages in a crim
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.