Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
JOHNSON JOHN
Deepu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT
JOHNSON JOHN, J.
This appeal is against the judgment in S.C. No. 144 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-II, Ernakulam. As per the impugned judgment, the first accused is convicted and sentenced underSection 307 IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and the second accused is convicted and sentenced under Section 323 IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.
2. During the pendency of the appeal, the second accused died and since fine does not form part of the sentence against the second accused, the appeal of the second accused is treated as abated.
3. As per the prosecution case, the accused were having enmity towards PW2 for the reason that he had questioned their unauthorised sale of liquor and on 06.08.2005, at about 10 p.m., there occurred an altercation between the second accused and PW2 about the unauthorised sale of liquor by the second accused in front of the residence and shop of PW2 at Kozhyvettumveli and then the second accused beat on the left cheek of PW2 and the first accused stabbed PW2 with a knife on the right abdomen resulting in the protrusion of intestine through the wound. The acc
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 testimony of an injured witness holds significant evidentiary value, and even minor contradictions do not undermine the reliability of their evidence in establishing an attempt to commit murder.
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....
The court clarified that for a conviction under section 307 IPC, there must be clear evidence of intent to kill, which was not established in this case.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove mens rea for the offence under Section 307 IPC and the interpretation of the nature of the injury in determining the ap....
The court clarified that a conviction for attempted murder requires clear evidence of intent, which was lacking, thus warranting a lesser charge.
The court upheld the conviction for attempted murder but granted probation instead of imprisonment, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment due to the appellant's age and reformation.
The court clarified that for a conviction under Section 307 IPC, the prosecution must prove the accused's intention to kill, which was not established in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the evidence presented by the prosecution only supported a charge under Section 304 Part –II IPC, and the appellant's conviction and sentence ....
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
