Gunshot Enough to Establish Intention to Cause Death for Offence of Attempt to Murder

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Gunshot Enough to...

In State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shamsher Singh, 2025 INSC 503, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with a Criminal Appeal set aside the impugned order of the Hon’ble High Court and held that Section 307 (Attempt to Murder) would stand attracted when there is intention or knowledge to cause death, though the hurt may be simple or grievous in nature. The sole Accused, working as a constable in the army, being unsatisfied with the food served at the mess during his posting, decided to settle scores then and there by opening fire with his AK-47 upon other constables, causing them grievous hurt. The High Court had reversed the conviction of the Trial Court and acquitted the Accused U/s. 307 and S. 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and instead convicted him U/s. 326 for grievous hurt, observing that there was a lack of intention or knowledge to cause death on his part. The Hon’ble Supreme Court restored the judgment of the Trial Court, observing that the Sole Accused, being in the army was well aware that a gunshot from such a weapon, if it hits anyone, can certainly result in causing death.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Omprakash Sahni Vs. Jai Shankar Chaudhary and Another; 2023 SCC Online SC 551

The Sentence Can Be Suspended under Section 389 CrPC, in Appeal Only If Convict Has Fair Chances of Acquittal. Also observations are made that the Appellate Court should not re-appreciate the evidence at the stage of Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. and try to pick up few lacunas or loopholes Read more »

Relieving Letter and Experience Certificate Are Not Compellable Where Non-Acceptance of Resignation Is Justified

In Bharat Aviation Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. vs. Rahul Sudhindra Soni, 2026, Live Law BHC-OS:11556, the Bombay High Court reiterated that contractual obligations arising under a valid service bond are capable of enforcement, and that a bond condition cannot, merely by its existence, be treated as unconstitutional or violative of Read more »

41-A CrPC Notice Not Valid If Served Through WhatsApp or Electronic Means

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI (2022 INSC 690), held that notices under Section 41-A of the CrPC cannot be served via WhatsApp or other electronic means. The Court emphasized strict adherence to the service methods prescribed under Chapter VI of the CrPC, 1973. This ruling Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.