Lucknow: The sessions court held that the circumstances of the shooting brought Prashant Chaudhary’s act within the ambit of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II of the IPC, rather than murder under Section 302. Lucknow police had filed the chargesheet under Section 302 IPC against Prashant Chaudhary.The concluded that the case did not come under Section 302 IPC because the bullet was not fired in a pre-planned manner and was instead shot in self defence.The court’s reasoning centred on the sequence of events during the intervening night of Sept 28-29, 2018, and particularly on Chaudhary’s assertion that he fired after apprehending danger to his life.According to the court, Chaudhary and Sandeep Kumar were patrolling in Gomti Nagar Extension on a motorcycle when they noticed an XUV car on a relatively deserted road late at night. The two policemen became suspicious of the vehicle and signalled its driver to stop.The court recorded that Tiwari, who was driving the XUV, accelerated in an attempt to leave the spot. The vehicle then hit the police motorcycle. The court further noted that Tiwari subsequently reversed the vehicle and again hit the motorcycle. It was during this sequence of events that Chaudhary, who was positioned in front of the vehicle, fired from his service weapon.A key observation in the sentencing order is that Chaudhary, while standing in front of the XUV, had apprehended danger to his life. The court recorded that he fired from his service weapon at the car’s windscreen. The bullet struck Tiwari in the face, causing injuries that resulted in his death.Thus, the court’s account does not describe the firing as an act carried out after the immediate confrontation had ended. Instead, it placed the firing in the midst of the confrontation, when the car had already struck the motorcycle and had then reversed and hit it again.
