Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2004) 9 SCC 31; AIR 2004 SC 2678
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2004-0008Sangli, MaharashtraJudgment 9 March 2004
Sangli District Police personnel vs State of Maharashtra
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of policeman for attempting to murder his sleeping colleague-relative a Sangli man with a service.303 rifle at the Sangli police headquarters guard room on 18 July 1983. The Court held intention and knowledge under Section 307 IPC proved, the bullet having struck the cot springs with splinters piercing the victim's leg, and sustained the Bombay High Court's upgrade of the trial court's Section 324 conviction to Section 307. It observed that a guardian of law firing in a public place deserved severe punishment but reduced the Section 307 term from ten to five years' RI given the peculiar background. The Arms Act conviction was maintained; the appeal otherwise stands dismissed.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 9 March 2004 in Criminal Appeal No. 522 of 1997, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: Y. K. Sabharwal, Arijit Pasayat, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Police personnel, Sangli District Police Headquarters, Maharashtra Police.
- Register number
- MH 10 CW 0002
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 522 of 1997 / (2004) 9 SCC 31; AIR 2004 SC 2678
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: Y. K. Sabharwal, Arijit Pasayat, JJ.), 9 March 2004
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, Sangli District Police Headquarters, Maharashtra Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Both intention and knowledge in terms of Section 307 can be attributed to the accused. Therefore, the High Court was justified in recording conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 307 IPC.” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 5 years.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 9 March 2004 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Both intention and knowledge in terms of Section 307 can be attributed to the accused. Therefore, the High Court was justified in recording conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 307 IPC.” (para n/a)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
9 Mar 2004
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2004) 9 SCC 31; AIR 2004 SC 2678
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.