Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Nemichand Sahu S/o Mantriram Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through the Police Station Patan, District – Respondent
Judgment :
(Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.)
1. Assail in the present criminal appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the CrPC preferred by the sole appellant-accused, is to the legality, validity and correctness of the judgment dated 26.09.2023 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 100/2022 by which the appellant herein has been convicted for offence under Section 307 of the IPC and sentenced thereunder to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years with fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default of payment of fine amount the appellant has to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for three months.
2. The case of the prosecution as projected by the prosecution and accepted by the trial Court is that on 26.03.2022 at about 8:45 am, at Dheemar para, in front of shop of Anmol, Police Station Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, the appellant assaulted Durga Dhimar (PW-1) with sickle by which she suffered injuries which were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. She was escorted to the hospital and was undergone for treatment from 26.03.2022 to 30.03.2022. The said incident was reported by Seukram (PW-2), father-in- law of the victi
The conviction under Section 307 IPC requires proof of intention to cause death or grievous bodily harm, which was established despite the injuries being classified as simple.
The conviction for attempt to murder was upheld based on sufficient evidence, while the sentences were reduced for being excessive.
Proof of grievous or life-threatening hurt is not essential for the offence punishable u/s 307 of the IPC. The intention of the accused can be ascertained from the actual injury and surrounding circu....
To establish an offence under Section 307 IPC, the prosecution must prove intent to kill, which cannot be inferred solely from the use of a lethal weapon or the nature of injuries inflicted.
The court clarified that mere injuries do not justify Section 307 IPC charges without evident homicidal intent, emphasizing strict interpretation of criminal law concerning bodily harm.
Court finds alteration of conviction from S.307 to S.308 IPC justified due to nature of injuries and circumstances of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
