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

Baby Manji Yamada Vs. Union of India, AIR (2009)

The case of Baby Manji Yamada v. Union of India, AIR (2009) SC 84, addressed the legal complexities of cross-border surrogacy. Following the separation of a Japanese couple before the birth of Baby Manji through a surrogacy agreement with an Indian surrogate, the Supreme Court prioritized the child’s welfare, directing Read more »

BCCI v. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd. Comm. Arb. Petition 4466/2020 (16th June 2021)

The Bombay High Court observed that an arbitral tribunal cannot apply public law principles on fairness and reasonableness. The Court held that "A writ court may well hold against a public body on a public law principle or by invoking Article 14; But an Arbitrator, constrained as he or she Read more »

K. Shanthamma Vs. State of Telangana, (2022) 4 SCC 574

That the proof of 'demand of bribe' by a public servant and its acceptance by him is sine qua non for establishing the offence of bribe taking, coming under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). 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.