Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
Subash @ Achu, S/o.Raghavan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
The sole accused in S.C.No.378/2012 on the files of Additional Sessions Judge, Pala, assails conviction and sentence imposed against him as per judgment dated 27.01.2014 in this appeal. Respondent is the State of Kerala.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the accused/appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the prosecution side.
3. I shall refer the parties in this appeal as ‘prosecution’ and ‘accused’ hereafter for easy reference.
4. Perused the trial court records and the judgment under challenge.
5. In this matter the accused was tried after framing charge for the offences punishable under Sections 452 , 294(b), 354 and 307 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (`IPC’ for short). The prosecution case is that at 5.30 p.m on 20.05.2012 the accused entered in the middle room of house No.55 in Ward No.5 of Teekoy Grama Panchayat while PW3 alone was there and uttered obscene words on her. Then the accused pulled the tuft of PW3’s hair and pushed her down. When PW3 got up, the accused attempted to murder PW3 by cutting on her neck and on her right palm by using a folding knife, a dangerous weapon.
6. Trial court examined PW1 to PW12 and Exts.P1 to P22 and M.O
The court affirmed that assault with intent to kill constitutes attempt to murder, and victim’s testimony is sufficient to establish guilt even without independent witnesses.
The court confirmed the conviction under Sections 452 and 307 of IPC, establishing that intent to kill can be inferred from the nature of the attack, even if the victim survives.
Under Section 307 IPC, intent to cause death can be established without severe injuries; circumstantial evidence and the nature of the weapon can indicate such intent.
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....
Conviction under Section 307 IPC affirmed based on corroborated eyewitness testimony and evidence suggesting intent to kill, regardless of fatal injury. The appeal was dismissed.
The conviction for attempt to murder was upheld based on sufficient evidence, while the sentences were reduced for being excessive.
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 under Section 307 IPC was not sustainable due to insufficient evidence of intent to kill, leading to modification to Section 324 IPC.
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
