Celebratory Firing During Marriage Ceremonies An Unfortunate Practise, Guns Not Meant To Be Used In Such Ceremonies: Supreme Court
In an unfortunate case where celebratory firing during a marriage ceremony resulted in the death of a person, the Supreme Court has called out such an exercise. Expressing dismay at such kind of firing, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma stated: “The act of celebratory firing during marriage ceremonies is an unfortunate yet prevalent practise in our nation....
In an unfortunate case where celebratory firing during a marriage ceremony resulted in the death of a person, the Supreme Court has called out such an exercise. Expressing dismay at such kind of firing, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma stated:
“The act of celebratory firing during marriage ceremonies is an unfortunate yet prevalent practise in our nation. The present case is a direct example of the disastrous consequences of such uncontrolled and unwarranted celebratory firing.”
In the present case, the appellant/ present accused opened fire in a crowded place, i.e., a marriage ceremony, without taking reasonable measures for safety. This resulted in the death of one of the persons present at the wedding (deceased).
The Trial Court convicted the accused on the charge of murder. The High Court affirmed the same. When the matter came up before the Apex Court, notice was issued on a limited point of whether the accused is liable for culpable homicide as against murder.
After perusing the evidence on record, the Court pointed out that there was no known prior enmity between the deceased and the appellant.
“whether the Appellant's act of engaging in celebratory firing during a marriage ceremony could be construed to be an act so imminently dangerous to, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as was likely to cause death?,” the Court posed this question for its adjudication.
Forming this legal background, the Court placed its reliance on Kunwar Pal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand (2014) 12 SCC 434. Therein, the Court, while dealing with a similar situation, had opined:
“In these circumstances, we find that the intention of the appellant to kill the deceased, if any, has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt and in any case the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt which is prominent in this case…Though it is not possible to attribute intention it is equally not possible to hold that the act was done without the knowledge that it is likely to cause death. Everybody, who carries a gun with live cartridges and even others know that firing a gun and that too in the presence of several people is an act, is likely to cause death, as indeed it did. Guns must be carried with a sense of responsibility and caution and are not meant to be used in such places like marriage ceremonies.”
The Top Court agreed that in the instant case, the accused did not take reasonable measures for safety. However, considering other circumstances, including the absence of intention and previous enmity, the Court reduced the appellant's conviction from murder to culpable homicide. Given that the appellant had already been in custody for eight years, the Court directed his release in the present case. Thus, the appeal was partly allowed.
It may be noted that in another case, the Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognizance of the issue of unlicensed guns and firearms.
Case Title: SHAHID ALI vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH., Diary No.- 25699 - 2021
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 222
Click here to read/ download the judgment