The Calcutta High Court has amended charges against Vijay Prakash, a BSF soldier initially accused of murder, to attempt to culpable homicide. The court has ordered the release of Prakash, who has served 11 years in prison. This compassionate verdict represents a significant turning point in the long-standing legal battle for the BSF soldier.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Calcutta High Court has reduced the charges against Border Security Force (BSF) soldier Constable Vijay Prakash. The soldier was initially charged with murder for firing shots that led to a civilian’s death. Now, the charges have been changed to attempt to culpable homicide, and the court has ordered his release after serving 11 years in prison.
Presided over by Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta, the single bench orchestrated a shift from Sections 302 & 307 IPC to Sections 304 & 308 IPC.
Section 302 of IPC –
Punishment for murder-
If someone commits murder, they can be punished with either death, life imprisonment, or a fine.
Section 307 of IPC –
Attempt to murder-
If someone does something to intentionally cause death or harm, they could go to jail for up to ten years and be fined. If the action hurts someone, the punishment might be life imprisonment or other penalties mentioned earlier. If the person is already serving life in prison and causes harm again, they could face the death penalty.
ALSO READ: Husband Giving Time, Money To Mother Not Domestic Violence: Court to Wife
Section 304 of IPC-
Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder-
An individual convicted of culpable homicide, falling short of murder, may be subject to a range of penalties. If the act leading to death is executed with the intention of causing death or severe bodily injury likely to result in death, the punishment could be imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for up to ten years, coupled with the possibility of a fine. On the other hand, if the act is committed with the knowledge that it may cause death but without the specific intention to cause death or severe bodily harm, the consequences may involve imprisonment for up to ten years, a fine, or both.
Section 308 of IPC-
Attempt to commit culpable homicide-
An individual who intentionally or knowingly performs an act that, if it resulted in death, would qualify as culpable homicide not amounting to murder, may face legal consequences. The potential punishment includes imprisonment for up to three years, a fine, or both. Furthermore, if the same act causes harm to another person, the offender could be subject to imprisonment for a period of up to seven years, a fine, or both.
The court directed the release of the ex-soldier due to the 11-year imprisonment already served, emphasizing that
“the offence in question was not murder but an offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.”
This incident, back to 2010, unfolded when Constable Vijay Prakash was initially convicted of murder and attempt to murder for firing recklessly, leading to the death of a civilian boy. The court proceedings revealed a series of tragic consequences at a civilian shop near their base.
ALSO READ: Most Women Pregnant Outside jails in West Bengal Prisons: Supreme Court Told
The defense, amidst multiple writ petitions, argued against the conviction, stressing the absence of evidence proving Prakash’s intoxication or prior animosity with the victims. The court proceedings highlighted a discrepancy in the prosecution’s case, emphasizing that the victim’s death was exacerbated by a delay in providing medical attention, as no BSF personnel assisted in the rescue.
The defense contended that proper medical care could have potentially saved the victim’s life. Additionally, it was argued that Prakash’s actions were provoked by false allegations and taunts from colleagues, particularly the statement “Oye Vijay Prakash Kya Marega Kisi Ko,” which allegedly fueled the soldier’s sudden and indiscriminate firing.
Contrary to the defense, the prosecution maintained that Prakash, with nearly 17 years of service, was a habitual offender. The Director General of BSF examined the contentions, supporting the charges against Prakash. The prosecution argued that the act of indiscriminate firing could not be justified, given Prakash’s awareness of the consequences.
ALSO READ: Calcutta High Court to Issue Ruling on Bhadra’s Bail Application on February 23
Following a thorough hearing, the High Court deemed the plea maintainable, noting the violation of natural justice rights during the GSF Court proceedings. The court observed that the firing resulted from a sudden fit of rage, not a premeditated act with the intent to kill.
