REPORTABLE                    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA

           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 970   OF 2007

SACHIDANAND THAKUR ..  APPELLANT(S)

vs.

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..  RESPONDENT(S)

O  R D E R

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.  

The facts leading to this appeal are as under:

The appellant was enrolled in the Indian Army in the  

year of 1978 and was deputed to an Artillery regiment. On  

the 6th January, 2000  he along  with two  other Sentries,  

Naik Sajimon and Lance Naik Shaiju, was on security duty as  

the Guard Commander in the Technical Battery Area of 501 AD

GP (SP). A 7.62 mm Self Loading Rifle bearing butt number  

259 had also been issued to him alongwith 20 cartridges. It  

appears that there was an incident of stone throwing on the  

Guard Hut and the matter was reported to the Security JCO,  

Naib Subedar Amrender Kumar.  The JCO issued instructions  

that a Quick Reaction Team be summoned.   This Team reached  

the  Guard  Hut  at  about  10.30  p.m.  and  the  vehicle  was  

challenged by the Sentry on duty.   

-2-

The Members of the Team came out of  the vehicle and  

moved  to  the  right  and  left  as  ordered  to  locate  the  

intruder who had thrown the stones.  At this stage the  

accused came running towards Naik Jityu Yadav, one of the  

members  of  the  Quick  Reaction  Team,  followed  by   Naik  

Sajimon KT who  warned  him that the person towards whom  

he, (the accused) was running was one of the members of the  

Quick Reaction Team and not to fire on him. Despite this  

information however the accused fired three shots from a  

distance of 8 to 10 ft. killing Naik Jityu Yadav at the  

spot.  He was quickly apprehended by PW.14 and the Security  

JCO PW.6 and when questioned as to what he had done, he  

replied `MAINE JO KARNA THA KAR DIYA'.  

Keeping  in  view  the  aforesaid   facts,  the  Court  

Martial before whom the appellant was tried, held that the  

shooting   was  a  deliberate  attack  of  murder  and  the

appellant was accordingly guilty under Section 302 of the  

IPC.  He was accordingly sentenced to life imprisonment  

along with several other penalties imposable  under the  

Army Act 1950.   

A writ petition was thereafter filed in the Punjab  

and Haryana High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution  

of India  and several issues of law and fact were raised  

before  the  Division  Bench.   The  High  Court  vide  its  

judgment dated 23/12/2005 repelled all the arguments and  

dismissed the writ petition and confirmed the findings of  

-3-

the  Court  Martial.  A  recall  application  was  also  moved  

before  the  High  Court  which  too  was  dismissed  on  23rd

November 2005. It is in this background that the matter is  

before us in appeal.

Before us today Mr. D. Thakur, the learned counsel  

for the appellant, has pointed out that from the facts of  

the case it was apparent that the killing was an accident  

and   arose  from  a  suspicion  of  a  terrorist  attack  as  

Ambala, being close to the Punjab State,  also faced this  

threat. He accordingly prays that a case under Section 302  

was not made out.

Mr. P.P. Tripathi, the learned A.S.G. has however  

submitted that the findings of fact recorded by the Court  

Martial  were  very  categoric  and  based  on  a  correct  

appreciation  of  the  evidence  and  the  High  Court  was  

justified in rejecting a challenge to those findings as  

interference by Courts in such matters was required to be  

minimal.

We  have  considered  the  arguments  advanced  by  the  

learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the  

record very carefully with their assistance.  As already  

pointed out the only argument raised by Mr. Thakur pertains  

to the finding of fact with regard to the murder.  We see  

from the order of the Court Martial that the appellant had  

fired  three  shots  at  the  deceased,  who  was  one  of  his  

colleagues in the Army, and this incident had been  

-4-

witnessed by several Army  personnel who had been posted  

with the accused at that time. The fact that the shots had  

been fired from 8 to 10 ft. has also been borne out by the

observations of Dr.  S. Sharma (PW.16) at the time of the  

post-mortem examination. It is also clear that the fired  

cartridge cases lifted from  the site of the incident also  

matched  the weapon issued to the accused.  If any doubt  

still  existed  with  regard  to  the  culpability  of  the  

appellant for murder it stands removed by the remark that  

he made when apprehended,  `MAINE JO KARNA THA KAR DIYA'.

It is also apparent from the evidence of PW.14  that  

he  had  cautioned  the  appellant  that  the  person  he  was  

chasing was in fact a member of the Quick Reaction Team and  

that he should not  fire on him but  despite this warning  

the appellant fired three shots.  We are, therefore, of the  

opinion that no error can be found with the findings of  

fact recorded by the Court Martial and upheld by the High  

Court.  This  Court  would  not,  in  these  circumstances,  

interfere in the assessment.

We accordingly find no merit in this appeal. It is  

accordingly dismissed.

                   .................J.         (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)

                     ....................J.

                                 (CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD) New Delhi,

    October 19, 2010.