1976 Supreme(Raj) 310
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
D.P.Gupta, J.
Nirmal Purshottam - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 481 of 1975 against the judgment of Shri M. R. Mitruka, Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jaipur City Dated May 31, 1975 in Sessions Case No. 81 of 1974.
Decided On : 20-08-1976
The essential ingredients of the offence of attempt to murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code are the intention to cause death and the knowledge that the act is likely to cause death.
Headnote:
ATTEMPT TO MURDER - SECTION 307 INDIAN PENAL CODE - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS - INTENTION TO CAUSE DEATH - KNOWLEDGE OF LIKELIHOOD OF DEATH - SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE - SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Nirmal Purshottam, was convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for stabbing Hridaya Nath Yagyanik in the abdomen, causing a life-threatening injury. The appellant and his companion had earlier teased Yagyanik's daughters at a betel shop, leading to an argument. After Yagyanik and his family left the shop, the appellant and his companion followed them in an auto-rickshaw and attacked Yagyanik with a knife.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant had the intention to cause death, as evidenced by his act of stabbing Yagyanik in the abdomen with a knife. The court also found that the appellant had the knowledge that his act was likely to cause death, as the injury was dangerous to life and required immediate medical attention.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant had the intention to cause death. 2. Whether the appellant had the knowledge that his act was likely to cause death. 3. Whether the sentence awarded to the appellant was appropriate.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the intention to cause death can be inferred from the nature of the act and the circumstances surrounding it. In this case, the appellant's act of stabbing Yagyanik in the abdomen with a knife was a clear indication of his intention to cause death. 2. The court held that the appellant had the knowledge that his act was likely to cause death, as the injury was dangerous to life and required immediate medical attention. 3. The court considered the appellant's young age as a mitigating factor and reduced the sentence from two and a half years to two years.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, maintaining the conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code but reducing the sentence to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 250/-.
JUDGMENT
1. - The circumstances which have given rise to this appeal briefly are that one Hridaya Nath Yagyanik along with his wife, brother, son and daughters had gone to a betel shop on the Mirza Ismail Road, Jaipur at about 8.30 p.m. on May 16, 1974 for taking betels. The appellant Nirmal Purshottam along with one Chander Chaudhary is alleged to have arrived at the shop at that time and both of them started teasing the daughters of Shri Yagyanik and passed indecent remarks. Thereupon Shri Yagyanik asked the appellant and his companion not to do so on which these two persons started abusing and quarrelling with Shri Yagyanik. Some by-stendars intervened and Shri Yagyanik with other members of his family returned towards his house after taking betels. But as soon as they reached near the Golcha Cinema House (as it was then popularly known) the appellant and his companion approached them in an auto-rickshaw and alighting therefrom the appellant caught hold of Shri Yagyanik and told him that he would teach him a lesson. The members of the family of Shri Yagyanik tried to intervenes, but the appellant took out a knife from his pocket and stabbed Shri yagyanik in the abdomen, causing a wound in his abdomen, as a result of which Shri Yagyanik became unconscious and started bleeding profusely. He was immediately removed to the hospital where he was operated upon and he had to remain as an indoor patient in the hospital for a period of about 4 months. A first information report about the aforesaid occurrence was lodged on May 16, 1974 itself at about 10 p.m. by Smt. Archana, daughter of the injured Shri Yagyanik, in which she narrated the entire incident and stated that from the talks that took place between the appellant and his companion she came to know that the names of the two assailants were Nirmal Purshottam and Chander Chaudhary. The appellant and his companion Chander Chaudhary were later on arrested by the police, who after usual investigation, presented a charge-sheet against both of them in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur City for committing offences under Sections 307 and 324 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code respectively. The learned Magistrate committed the appellant and Chander Chaudhary to stand their trial in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jaipur City and while a charge under Section 307 Indian Penal Code was framed against the appellant, a charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code was framed against Chander Chaudhary by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jaipur City, who after a trial convicted the appellant under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo two and half years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. However, Chander Chaudhary was acquitted of the charge under Section 307 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code The appellant, Nirmal Purshottam has filed the present appeal against the aforesaid order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Jaipur City dated May 31, 1975 convicting him under Section 307 Indian Penal Code, as mentioned above.
2. The testimony of Kumari Vandana PW 1, Smt. Nirmala Yagyanik PW 2, Surendra Jain PW 3, Kamal Kishore PW 6, Smt. Archana PW 7 and Hridayanath Yagyanik PW 8 is unanimous on the point that the appellant along with his companion came to the betal shop of Ram Singh situated at Mirza Ismail Road, Jaipur and started teasing the girls when the family of Shri Hridayanath Yagyanik was taking betels from the aforesaid shop and when Shri Yagyanik objected they started abusing him. These witnesses have also stated that both the appellant and his companion were drunk and they hurled abuses and when thejfamily of Shri Yagyanik moved towards their residence after taking betels, the appellant and his companion again approached them in an auto-rickshaw near the Golcha Cinema House. The auto-rickshaw w
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
