Back
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Durga Shanker – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for revision petition. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding charge under ipc. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. trial material and witness statements. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. legal standards for framing charges. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. importance of considering all evidence. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. conclusion and order of remand. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jain, J. - Instant Revision Petition is preferred aggrieved from order dated 20.7.2023 in Sessions case No. 57/2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Kekri, District Ajmer, Whereby charge under Sections 34 1, 323, 324 & 304/34 IPC were framed against the petitioners.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners while relying upon judgment of this Court in cases of Brahmanand & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan, AIR 1970 (Raj.) 220, Shambhudayal & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr., in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1035/2021 on 30.9.2022, Magha Ram Meghwal & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, 2017 (3) Cri.LR (Raj) 1352 and Mohammad Salman @ Sukz @ Kabootar v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. In S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 408/2023 on 08.05.2023 submitted that FIR was registered on 24.6.2022, which indicate: that
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.
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.
Intent to kill is essential for Section 307 IPC; mere infliction of injury does not establish attempted murder without clear evidence of intent.
Framing charges under Section 307 IPC requires clear evidence of intent or knowledge to kill, which was lacking, thereby limiting the charges to less serious offences.
For framing charges under Section 307 IPC, intention and knowledge are crucial, and a prima facie case must be established based on the injuries and circumstances surrounding the incident.
The court affirmed that for Section 307 IPC, causing hurt with intent or knowledge is sufficient, and the trial court must assess evidence to determine if charges are warranted.
Intent and knowledge regarding the commission of offences under Section 307 IPC can be inferred from actions and circumstances, regardless of the nature or extent of actual injuries inflicted.
Discharge stage limits court to prima facie case assessment without evidence scrutiny; 'dangerous to life' injury equals grievous hurt, but single abdominal sharp blow amid road rage insufficient for....
For charges under IPC Section 307, mere injuries perceived as simple do not absolve the accused; intent demonstrated through acts suffices, even without grievous harm.
The court held that the mere presence of injuries does not negate intent; evidence of planning and the nature of injuries confirmed the charge of attempt to murder, illustrating the required intent a....
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
