Back
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Mohammad Salman @ Suka @ Kabootar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER
1. The instant appeal is preferred by appellant accused aggrieved from order dated 25.01.2023 in Sessions Case No. 126/2022 arising out of FIR No. 279/2022 registered at P.S. Jawahar Circle, Jaipur City (East) whereby learned Special Judge [SC/ST (POA) Act Cases], Jaipur Metro-I had framed charges under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323/149, 307/149 and 506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that the sole injured in the case is Rahul and his injury report along with X-ray report is available on record which clearly indicated that injuries No.1 to 4 were found to be simple in nature and caused by blunt object whereas opinion was reserved with respect to injury No.5 and ultimately same was opined as simple in nature. He submitted that in case of simple injuries charge under Section 307 IPC cannot be framed by learned trial court but learned trial Court had failed to appreciate the fact that not a single iota of evidence is available to substantiate the charge under Section 307 IPC. He further submitted that appellant was not aware about the fact that complainant was a member of SC community and even if assuming
Charges under Section 307 IPC require clear evidence of intent to kill, which was absent in this case, leading to partial discharge.
The prosecution must prove all elements of an offence beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence led to a conviction modification from Section 307 to Section 324 IPC.
Charges under Section 307 IPC cannot be framed without clear evidence demonstrating common intention to kill, emphasizing the need for careful assessment of material at the charge stage.
The court established that intent to kill must be proven for a conviction under Section 307 IPC, and actions must be motivated by caste discrimination to apply the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
The absence of injuries undermined the charge of attempted murder under Section 307 IPC, which requires intention to cause death, clarifying that intention must be inferred from circumstances.
Charges under Section 307 IPC were improperly framed as the injuries were not grievous; the court directed charges under Section 308 IPC instead.
A charge under section 307 cannot be sustained when the evidence fails to establish intent to kill, affirming a need to assess injuries and circumstances carefully.
At the charge framing stage, the court only needs to establish a prima facie case indicating the accused might have committed the offence, without delving into the sufficiency of evidence.
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
