SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2010(1) Crimes 484 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT
K.T. Sankaran, J.
Sreekumar —Petitioners
versus
State of Kerala and Anr. —Respondents
Bail Application No. 2535 of 2009
Decided on 25.6.2009

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:S.V. Rajan, Smt. K.V. Bhadra Kumari, Smt. Shibi, K.P., Advocates.
For the Respondents: K.S. Sivakumar, P.P.

IMPORTANT POINT
Section 326 IPC in clear and unambiguous terms provides that the instrument referred to therein is of such a nature that if it is used as a weapon of offence, it is likely to cause death. The expression “is likely to cause death” is attributable to instrument which is used as weapon of offence and not to the “grievous hurt”.

Headnote:(i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 438—Anticipatory bail—Case was registered under Sections 341, 324, 328 and 307/34 IPC—De facto complainant sustained open fracture on right patella besides other injuries and was subjected to surgery and was discharged after 10 days—Anticipatory bail pleaded on plea that offence attracted would be under Section 325 and not under Section 326 IPC as grievous hurt was not opined dangerous to life—Expression “is likely to cause death” in Section 326 IPC is referable to the instrument which used as weapon of offence and not to the “grievous hurt” —In facts and circumstances, nature and gravity of offence, petitioner found not entitled to anticipatory bail. (Paras 6 and 7)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 326—Expression “is likely to cause death” is attributable to instrument which is used as weapon of offence and not to grievous hurt”. (Para 6)

       Result: Application dismissed.

       

ORDER

K.T. Sankaran, J.—The petitioner, who is the first accused in Crime No.144 of 2009 of Balarampuram Police Station, has filed this application seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused persons are under Sections 341, 324, 326 and 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case is that on 24.3.2009 at about 7.30 p.m., while the de facto complainant was returning from the ration shop, the accused persons attacked him with a chopper and iron rod. The de facto complainant sustained injuries. He was admitted in the hospital. The treatment certificate shows that the de facto complainant sustained open fracture on the right patella and other injuries. The de facto complainant was subjected to a surgery. He was discharged from the hospital on 3.4.2009.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code would not be attracted even if all the allegations levelled against the accused are found to be true. The counsel submitted that at best those allegations would attract Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, which is a bailable offence. It is also submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case Section 307 is also not attracted.

4. Though normally it is not necessary to arrive at a finding on the merits of the case, while disposing of an application for bail or an application for anticipatory bail. I have no other option but to arrive at a finding on the contentions raised by the petitioner, since the learned counsel for the petitioner persistently contended that the offence under Section 326 would not be attracted on the facts alleged and that only a bailable offence under Section 325 would be attracted.

5. For the sake of convenience Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is extracted below:

“326. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means: Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence is likely to cause death or by means of fire or any heated substance or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale to swallow or to receive into the blood or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.”

The contention of the accused for the petitioner is that to attract Section 326 not only that grievous hurt should be caused and a weapon of the kind mentioned in the section is used, but the injuries sustained by the victim should be such that those injuries are likely to cause death. He submitted that the expression “is likely to cause death” occurring in Section 326 relates to the grievous hurt and the injuries sustained by the victim and not the weapon, namely, instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting or other instrument mentioned in the section. In other words, according to the counsel even if a weapon of the kind mentioned in Section 326 is used for committing an offence and thereby grievous hurt is caused to attract Section 326, the injuries caused should be such as is likely to cause death. I am not inclined to accept this contention. The fallacy of the contention raised by the petitioner would be clear from a reading of Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 324 reads as follows:

“324. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means: Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which used as weapon of offence, is likely to cause death or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top