“The act of celebratory firing during marriage ceremonies is an unfortunate yet prevalent practice in our nation:” Supreme Court
On March 11, 2024, the Supreme Court (SC) of India, while hearing the Shahid Ali vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh case expressed concern about celebratory firing during a marriage ceremony that resulted in the death of an individual. The bench, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Vikram Nath held that “the act of celebratory firing during marriage ceremonies is an unfortunate yet prevalent practice in our nation.” It added that the present case is a direct example of the disastrous consequences of such uncontrolled and unwarranted celebratory firing.
In this case, an FIR was lodged by Gulab Ali (PW1), the chowkidar of village Katena Sikeriya stating that the marriage ceremony of the daughter of Nizamuddin was being celebrated where Ishfaq Ali (the Deceased), another co-accused person i.e., Shahid Ali, and other relatives were invited. The FIR further states that amidst the marriage ceremony, the Appellant shot at Ishfaq Ali which resulted in an injury on his neck and ultimately led to his demise on the spot. The FIR also highlighted previous enmity between the Deceased and the accused. Furthermore, it was stated that a large number of person(s) saw the alleged incident as there were many people at the marriage ceremony.
The accused/appellant was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of the fine, to undergo six months of rigorous imprisonment; and 5 years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 25/ 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The Allahabad High Court upheld the decision of the Trial Court. The matter was therefore mentioned before the SC where the main question addressed was “Whether the Appellant’s act of engaging in celebratory firing during a marriage ceremony could be construed to be an act so imminently dangerous so as to, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as was likely to cause death?”
During the proceedings, the SC considered its previous decision in the Kunwar Pal Singh vs, State of Uttarakhand (2014) case, “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…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.”
Furthermore, the SC opined, “Be that as it may, in the absence of any evidence on record to suggest that either that the Appellant aimed at and/or pointed at the large crowd whilst engaging in such celebratory firing; or there existed any prior enmity between the Deceased and the Appellant, Supreme Court finds itself unable to accept the Prosecution’s version of events as were accepted by the Trial Court and confirmed by the High Court.” It added, “There can be no qualm about the fact that the Appellant opened fire in a crowded place i.e., a marriage ceremony without taking reasonable measures for safety, which led to the unfortunate demise of the Deceased.”
After hearing the matter, the SC concluded that the appellant was guilty of the commission of ‘culpable homicide’ within the meaning of Section 299 IPC i.e., punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC. It further said that the conviction and sentence of the Appellant under Section 302 IPC were set aside and he was convicted for an offence under Section 304 Part II of the IPC.
