SHAMSHER KHAN versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 287 · Decided: 19-10-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.T. THOMAS, R.P. SETHI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

SHAMSHER KHAN 
A 
v. 
ST A TE (NCT OF DELHI) 
OCTOBER 19, 2000 
[K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] 
B 
Criminal Law : 
Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 299, 304 and 308-Manufacture 
and stocking of bombs in a house clandestinely-Explosion of bombs during C 
manufacture-Conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder-
Held, on facts, there is no evidence to show that appellant had knowledge 
that manufacture of bombs would result in explosion; no evidence to prove 
that mere manufacture of bombs likely to cause death-Terrorists artd 
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987-Explosive Substances Act. 
Appellant-accused along with other persons was manufacturing and 
stocking explosive bombs clandestinely in his house at Delhi, with a criminal 
conspiracy fo use them on an appropriate occasion. The bombs exploded in 
D 
the house resulting in death of three persons and injuring nineteen others. 
Some adjoining multi-storeyed houses also collapsed in the impact. Appellant E 
was charged for offences under Section 304, 308 and 120-8 l.P.C and 
Section 5 of TADA and Section 4(b) of the Explosive Substances Acts. He was 
sentenced to imprisonment and fine. 
In appeal to this Court, the appellant challenged the conviction and 
sentence for culpable homicide under Section 299 l.P.C. 
p 
Respondent contended that the case of the appellant falls within the 
ambit of the third alternative to Section 299 l.P.C.; and that the appellant did 
an act with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death of 
another person. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: I. The act of the appellant proved to have been committed along 
with the other person who died in the explosion in manufacture of explosive 
substance like bombs. If some other act had intervened which the offender 
G 
did not do consciously which triggered the explosions, that could not be H 
287. 
288 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A counted as the act for that offender. No evidence was brought in by prosecution 
to show that mere manufacture of such bombs is likely to cause death of any 
person, nor any evidence for showing that appellant had the knowledge that 
by manufacturing bombs death would possibly be caused to any human being 
without any other act being done. The prosecution has also not brought out 
B any circumstance by which the Court could remotely attribute knowledge to 
the appellant that by manufacturing and possessing bombs death .of any 
person was a likely consequence. By manufacturing a bomb alone no one can 
normally think that it would explode without anything more done. Something 
more would have happened which caused the explosion which is not known. 
There is no material to show that the appellant had done that additional act. 
C There is no scope to bring the proved facts within the ambit of Section 299 
l.P.C. The question of culpable homicide would stand at bay. It is difficult 
legally to confirm the conviction for the offences under Sections 304 and 
308 J.P.C. The conviction and sentence passed on the appellant on these 
counts is set aside. With regard to other counts, the conviction and sentence 
is confirmed. (291-C-G I 
D 
E 
CRIMINAL APP ELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 
502 of2000. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2/3.5.2000 of the Designated Court-
11 (TADA) (P) ACT In Session Case No. 562of1996. 
Shailendra Bhardwaj, R.P. Singh Pal and Chander Shekhar Ashri for the 
Appellant. 
Ashok Bhan, Ms. Sunita Sharma and D.S. Mehra for the Respondent. 
F 
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered : 
During the wee hours on 2.11.1989 a shuddering bomb explosion took 
place at J.J. colony in Shakurpur (Delhi) Three persons died in the explosion 
almost instantaneously and 19 others were injured, some of them very seriously. 
The impact of the explosion was such that four adjoining multi-storeyed houses 
G collapsed. The investigating agency concluded that explosion was the aftermath 
of stalking bombs in the house of the appellant which was done by himself in 
association with one of the victims (Babu Khan) and some others including 
the co-accused. They further found that there was a criminal conspiracy to 
manufacture explosive bombs to be used on an appropriate occasion. 
H 
The appellant Shamsher Khan was one of the four persons arraigned 
SHAM SHER KHAN v. ST ATE (NCT OF DELHI) 
289 
before a Designated Court constituted under Terrorists and Disruptive A 
Activities (Prevention) Ac

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