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

1995 Supreme(Raj) 338

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Rajendra Saxena
Kishan Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 153 of 1991
Decided On : 07/03/1995

Advocates Appeared:
Pradeep Shah, for the Appellant
Daulat Singh Rathore, Public Prosecutor and M.K. Garg, for the Respondents

At the stage of considering discharge or framing of charges under Sections 227 and 228 of the CrPC, the court is not required to meticulously judge the truth, veracity, or effect of the evidence or to weigh the probable defense of the accused. The purpose of the inquiry is to determine whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused or whether there is a ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offense.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 307, IPC - DISCHARGE OF ACCUSED - GROUNDS - SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE - INTERPRETATION OF SECTIONS 227 AND 228, CRPC - INTENTION TO KILL - NATURE OF INJURIES - RELEVANCE - PRESUMPTION OF OFFENCE - FRAMING OF CHARGE.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Kishan Singh, was allegedly attacked by the accused respondent, Vikram Singh, with a 'Khukhari' (a lethal weapon) causing multiple injuries to his head and other body parts. The petitioner stated that the accused intended to kill him due to a dispute over the rental property. An FIR was registered, and the accused was arrested. The trial court discharged the accused for the offense under Section 307, IPC, and transferred the case to the CJM for trial of other offenses.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the trial court erred in discharging the accused for the offense under Section 307, IPC. The court found that there was sufficient ground to presume that the accused had committed the offense based on the petitioner's 'Parcha bayan' (initial statement), police statement, and the statement of an alleged eyewitness, Shankerlal, who claimed to have seen the accused inflicting multiple 'Khukhari' blows on the petitioner with the intent to kill him.

Issues: 1. Whether the trial court erred in discharging the accused for the offense under Section 307, IPC. 2. Whether there was sufficient ground to presume that the accused had committed the offense under Section 307, IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Sections 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which deal with the discharge of accused persons and the framing of charges. It held that at the stage of considering discharge or framing of charges, the court is not required to meticulously judge the truth, veracity, or effect of the evidence or to weigh the probable defense of the accused. 2. The court clarified that the standard of test and judgment applied at the conclusion of the trial to determine guilt or innocence is not the same as that applied at the initial stage of making an order under Sections 227 or 228 of the CrPC. 3. The court emphasized that the purpose of the inquiry under Sections 227 and 228 is to determine whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused or whether there is a ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offense. 4. The court held that the trial court failed to consider the record of the case and the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer in a proper perspective. It erred in ignoring the specific assertion of the petitioner and the alleged eyewitness that the accused intended to kill the petitioner by inflicting multiple 'Khukhari' blows on his head and other body parts.

Final Decision: The High Court allowed the revision petition, set aside the impugned order of the trial court, and directed the trial court to frame a charge under Section 307, IPC, and other appropriate offenses against the accused respondent, Vikram Singh, and to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.

Judgment

Rajendra Saxena, J.-This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 17-7-1991 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases cum Addl. Sessions Judge, Bikaner, whereby he discharged the accused respondent Vikram Singh for the offence under Section 307, I.P.C, and transferred the case under Section 228(1)(a) CrPC to the learned C.J.M. to try the remaining offences; in accordance with law.

2. Now briefly the factual matrix of this case. It appears that on the ‘Parcha bayan’ of injured Kishan Singh recorded by Shri Bhan Singh A.S.I, on 10-7-1986 at 1.10 a.m., in P.B.M. Hospital, Bikaner, a case under Sections 307 and 324, I.P.C, was registered at Police Station, Kotgate, Bikaner. The petitioner, in his ‘Parcha bayan’ stated that on that night at about 12-15 a.m., while he was going to his house and came near the Old Petrol Pump situated near Public Park, Bikaner, on his scooter, a person whose face was rapped-with cloth, came in front of his scooter; that he tried to avoid him that the said person dealt a blow by some sharp object on the back side of his head with the result that he fell down. Thereafter, the assailant inflicted another blow causing injuries on his right palm and fingers. The assailant also caused injuries on his right and left belows that meanwhile he caught hold of the weapon of the assailant, which was found to be a ‘Khukhari’ that he also snatched the cloth wrapped around the face of the assailant, which was untied and he identified that the assailant was Vikram Singh that thereafter, Vikram Singh, with an intention to kill him, inflicted five-six ‘Khukhari’ blows on the head causing extensive injuries to him. On the alarm raised by him, Shankerlal came there and that thereupon Vikram Singh fled away. The petitioner also stated in his ‘Parcha bayan’ that thereafter somebody informed the police; that he was lifted in a police jeep and admitted in the hospital. He also stated that he has taken on rent the house of Vikram Singh for his Company; that Vikram Singh forcibly wanted to eject him therefrom and for that reason, Vikram Singh inflicted injuries to him with an intention to commit his murder. On the same day at about 3.15 a.m., petitioner’s dying declaration was also recorded by the learned A.M.J.M., Bikaner. The doctor found as many as seventeen injuries on the person of Kishan Singh including the following six injuries, which were found on various parts of his head:

1. Incised wound 10 cm. X 0.5 cm. x bone deep on both occipital region is of scalp across the mid line and on the left parietal region of scalp obliquely placed;

2. Incited wound 2.8 cm. x 0.5 cm. x bone deep on both parietal regions of scalp distal 1/2 obliquely placed across the mid line & just medial to the parietal part of injury No. 1;

3. Incised wound 3.6 cm. x 0.5 cm. x bone deep on both parietal regions of scalp across the mid line;

4. Incised wound 3.5 cm. x 0.3 cm. x bone deep on right parieto occipital region;

5. Incised wound 2.5 cm. x 02. cm. x bone deep on right fronto parietal region; and

6. Incised wound 2.5 cm. x 0.3 cm. x bone deep on the right frontal region of scalp.” There were multiple incised wounds on his right little finger, right upper arm, left little ring, middle and index fingers or the palmar aspect and left little, ring, middle and index fingers cutting tendons of the left index finger.

3. Thepetitioner, who was admitted in the P.B.M. Hospital on 10-7-1986 as an indoor patient left that hospital on [19-7-1986 without permission of the doctor. Thereafter, he was admitted in the Military Hospital from 19-7-1986 to 28-7-1986 and from there, he was referred and admitted in S.M.S. Hospital, Jaipur from 29-7-1986 to 11-8-1986, where he was operated upon by Dr. vs. M. Pande for multiple incised wounds in both hands, which had impaired sensation in his two fingers and inner side of the palms. The X-ray examination of petitioner’s skull and right elbow, howeve





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top