EXPLANATION ON SECTIONS

 

EXPLANATION ON SECTIONS

 

 

1.   Section 302 IPC – Punishment for Murder

 

• Provision: Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

 

• Relevance: The petitioner is allegedly connected with the murder of the complainant’s father. This is the gravest charge against him.

 

2.   Section 212 IPC – Harbouring a Criminal

 

• Provision: Whoever harbours or conceals any person, knowing or having reason to believe that such person has committed an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 2 years or more, shall be punished with imprisonment for up to 7 years and/or fine.

 

• Relevance: Allegation implies that the petitioner may have allegedly harboured or assisted the principal accused or co-accused in evading the law.

 

3.   Section 120B IPC – Criminal Conspiracy

 

• Provision: Whoever conspires to commit an offence is liable for punishment:

 

• If the object of the conspiracy is to commit an offence punishable with death, life imprisonment, or rigorous imprisonment for 2+ years, the conspirators are liable for the same punishment as the substantive offence.

 

• Relevance: The petitioner is alleged to have been part of a criminal conspiracy to commit murder.

 

4.   Section 25(1)(a) Arms Act, 1959 – Unlawful Possession of Firearms

 

• Provision: Possession or carrying of a firearm or ammunition without licence is punishable under the Act.

 

• Relevance: The firearms used in the alleged murder were unlicensed, bringing the petitioner within the purview of Section 25(1)(a).

 

5.   Section 27 Arms Act, 1959 – Use of Firearms in Offence

 

• Provision: Use of firearms in commission of any offence is an enhancing factor, punishable with more severe penalties.

 

• Relevance: Allegedly, the murder was committed using firearms, which is why Section 27 is invoked.

 

6.   Section 35 Arms Act, 1959 – Abetment or Conspiracy

 

• Provision: Whoever abets, conspires, or is a party to any offence under the Arms Act is liable to the same punishment as if they directly committed the offence.

 

• Relevance: The petitioner is charged with abetment/conspiracy, despite no direct participation in the shooting itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bail Application Note on Sections

 

Even though the petitioner is charged under Sections 302, 212, 120B IPC read with Sections 25(1)(a), 27 & 35 Arms Act, it is significant that:

 

1.   He is not named in the FIR.

2.   His name only surfaced in the charge-sheet.

3.   No witness examined so far has implicated him.

4.   Investigation is complete and further custodial interrogation is unnecessary.

5.   Co-accused, including the principal accused, have already been granted bail, justifying bail to the petitioner on parity and fundamental rights grounds.

 

 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts have repeatedly held that liberty of an individual is of paramount consideration and that bail is the rule and jail is the exception. Reference may be made to the decisions in State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay, AIR 1977 SC 2447; Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429; and Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40.