In a recent ruling, a sessions court in Lucknow determined that Prashant Chaudhary’s actions during a shooting incident fall under culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as defined by Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This decision contrasts with the charges initially filed by Lucknow police, which were based on Section 302 IPC, categorizing the act as murder. The court’s assessment highlights a significant legal distinction in the interpretation of Chaudhary’s actions during the incident.
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.
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, according to the court. 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. 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.