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

Moral Responsibility Alone Insufficient for Criminal Liability, Charge or Control Over Child Essential to Punish under S. 75 of the JJ Act

In S.C. Narang Vs. State (NCT Of Delhi), 2025 INSC 688, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 cannot be used to punish Chairman of the school's Managing Committee as he neither has actual charge of the child nor control over him/her. The Read more »

Arbitrators Can Grant Interest on Interest

In North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. S.A. Builders Ltd., the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while adjudicating a civil appeal by special leave, affirmed that an arbitrator is empowered to grant post-award interest on both the principal amount and the pre-award interest accrued thereon. The case arose from a contractual dispute concerning Read more »

Union of India Vs. Pranav Srinivasan (2024 INSC 792)

In Union of India v. Pranav Srinivasan (2024 INSC 792), the Supreme Court ruled that Pranav Srinivasan, a foreign national born in Singapore to Indian-origin parents, could not claim Indian citizenship under Article 8 of the Constitution or Section 8(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. Pranav sought to resume his 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.