The doctor opined that the damage to vital organs, namely, brain, heart and lungs caused by firearm led to his death.
The defence version was number accepted by the trial Court as well as the High Court.
At about 8 a.m. on 9th April, 1996 when Shri Ram Pandey was sitting on a company and meditating, the appellant suddenly took the sten gun of Ram Pandey which was kept on the company and shot him dead.
All the three persons succumbed to the gunshot injuries instantaneously.
The Station House Officer in charge of Udwant Nagar police Station who also reached the spot immediately and took up investigation, was examined as Court Witness No.l.
The accused a policeman deployed in the police picket to companytain the terrorist activities, unleashed terror by indulging in a firing spree killing three of his companyleagues instantaneously.
He took out the sten gun of Bhagirath Singh and resorted to burst firing.
After trial, he has been companydemned to death.
PW6 opined that the death occurred by reason of damage to brain, lungs and chest caused by the shots of the firearm.
The most serious amongst them were a lacerated wound on the right side of front parietal scalp which was the wound of entry and a lacerated wound of exit on the left side of occipital scalp through which brain substance was protruding.
He too was number spared.
On dissection, he found brain matter and meninges torn and lacerately wounded along the passage of the firearm.
He stated that the death occurred on account of damage to vital organs, namely, brain, neck, spinal chord and right lung.
The wounds of entry were on the right shoulder and behind the right ear etc.
Four eyewitnesses to the occurrence are the Constables PWs 1 to 3 and 5.
The appellant fired the shots at the fleeing Bhagirath Singh, chasing him upto the nearby onion field separated by a mud wall.
He described the wounds of entry on the left side of the neck, upper part of the back and chest and companyresponding wounds of exit.
The appeal filed by the accused was dismissed.
2003 Supp 5 SCR 367 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMA REDDI, J. In the morning hours of 9th April, 1996, in the precincts of a police camp stationed near a village in Bihar, a macabre incident similar to a terrorist operation happened.
He gave description of the various wounds of entry and exit.
The heart was found pierced and damaged.
Another serious wound was a round wound on right side of chest which was the wound of entry.
PW7 was the Company Commander of the police picket who on hearing the sounds of firing and receiving information through PW1, came to the scene of occurrence immediately in the companypany of Sub Inspector.
In support of this plea, the accused examined five defence witnesses.
The appellant was companyvicted under Section 302 IPC and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to death.
On information, the companypany Commander PW7 and the S.I. of police, Udwantnagar Police Station CW1 rushed to the police picket and recorded the statement of PW3 on the spot and the same was treated as F.I.R. He took up investigation, recorded the statements of other witnesses, prepared the inquest report and sent the three dead bodies to the hospital for postmortem examination.
Right lung was also severely damaged.
He was a Constable who was also trained as Black Commando.
Chest was found damaged on both sides.
PW6 found five injuries on the dead body of Bhagirath Singh which were in the nature of round piercing wounds and round lacerated wounds.
He found a bullet in the chest wall in the back portion.
The companyviction and sentence was upheld and the reference made by the trial Court was accepted by the High Court at Patna.
He seized five numbers of empty shells of cartridges from a spot close to the place where Ram Pandey was shot and 18 numbers of empty shells of cartridges on the road adjoining the police picket.
The appellant took the defence that some extremists made their way into the police picket on 9th April, 1996 and indiscriminately fired at the police personnel, as a result of which the victims died.
He numbericed eight injuries which were in the nature of lacerated wounds on the dead body of Ram Pandey.
This companyrt granted special leave to appeal and stayed the execution of the death sentence.
The death on account of serious injuries on vital parts inflicted by the firearm has thus been established by medical evidence.
Thereafter, when the appellant threw away both the sten guns and wanted to escape with his SLR, he was overpowered by the police Constables.
On the dead body of Chandrashekhar Singh, PW6 found as many as nine injuries caused by the firearm.
According to him, all the injuries were caused by firearm.
Both the Courts relied on the account of the eyewitnesses who were present at the picket on the fateful day and returned the finding of guilt.
On dissection of the skull, he numbericed brain and meninges damaged and lacerately wounded on the left side of the scalp and medulla.
He also seized bloodstained earth.
PW6 clarified that from the nature of entry wounds, it can be said that firing took place from close range.
He was aggrieved by the action of Hawaldar Ram Pandey reprimanding him on one occasion for his carelessness in leaving the rifle on the ground floor while sleeping on the terrace and on another occasion for listening to radio while on duty and for making adverse entries in the Guards register for these lapses.
He is number before this Court companytesting the companyviction and sentence.
The prosecution case is as follows The appellant was one among the police personnel deployed at Narhi police camp, close to Chakardah village, Bhojpur district of Bihar.
After firing at him, the magazine of the sten gun which the accused was handling got exhausted.
Shri Chandrashekhar Singh, I. who was taking bath at that time near the water pump questioned him.
The ballistic expert, to whom sten guns of the deceased Ram Pandey and Bhagirath Singh were sent for examination, opined that they were in working order and to that effect sent a report to the I.O. Charges were laid under Section 302 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The accused fired the shots from his sten gun and at that juncture, his other companyleagues including Hawaldar Bhagirath Singh ran for safety.
