ARMS CASE LAW ON:-DEATH BY ACCIDENTIAL FIRING

[hock ann]

Mr. A, went to the house of Mr. B, who was engrossed in a drinking bout. the latter, being quiet respectful and hospitable to the former, offered him meals and his company for the night. However, on seeing Mr.A, leaving his house, he probably let go his gun without precisely aiming at him simply to frighten him from leaving his house. However, the shot hit Mr.A, in the chest and consequently he died later on. The Hon'able Supreme Court, after taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, held
"On the material placed on the record it could not be held proved that Mr.B, had any intention of firing at Mr.A, He seems to have pulled the trigger without aiming at Mr.B, in a state of intoxication in order to see that by the gun-fire Mr.A, was prevented from leaving his place. It was wholly a rash and negligent act on Mr.B's, part or at the worst it was an act which would amount to man-slaughter. It could not be held to constitute an offence of murder. Mr.B, was therefore guilty of an offence under S-304-A, Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonmant already undergone by him.

MEERA PURI v STATE OF NAGALAND : 1971 Cri. LJ. 539 (ASSAM & NAGALAND)

Hock ann,

[Zafar]

thanks hock

[nagarifle]

i have never came across some one who was so desperate to have some company that he shot the leaving guest. thus depriving ones company for ever

i am sure that there is some kind of moral here for us to learn from. (never drink with a lonely man?)

[Zafar]

never drink with a lonely man?

for everybody it should be Never Drink, not even alone