Back
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Jahangir Ansari, Son of Late Rahim Mian – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Above named appellants have preferred this criminal appeal challenging their conviction and sentence dated 20.01.2018/27.01.2018 passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 25 of 2006, arising out of Sonaraithari Sarwan P.S. Case No.84 of 2005 (G.R. Case No.508 of 2005) registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been held guilty for the offence under Sections 307, 323 and 147 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years for the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. with fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation, R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 147 of the I.P.C. and one year for the offence under Section 323 of the I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal in a narrow compass is that on 03.07.2005 at about 6:00 AM, the informant was ploughing his field, meanwhile, present appellants namely, Ashin Ansari (since deceased), Jahangir Ansari, Bhutel Ansari, Karu Mian, Is
The court ruled that lack of intent to kill, evidenced by the nature of injuries, invalidated the conviction under Section 307, while maintaining convictions under Sections 323 and 324 with reduced s....
Conviction under Section 307 of the IPC requires clear intent; mere mutual combat without intent negates attempted murder charges.
Point of law : Conviction under section 307 set aside - Simple injuries - No injury was dangerous to life.
The court modified the conviction from attempted murder to causing hurt, finding insufficient evidence of intent to kill under Section 307.
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 307 IPC, establishing intent to cause grievous harm based on corroborated eyewitness and medical evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of injuries sustained and the absence of evidence reflecting an intention to commit murder influenced the court's decision in al....
Conviction for attempted murder under the IPC was inappropriate given the lack of intent, and the appellants were entitled to probation benefits due to the case's circumstances.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 307 IPC, establishing that the appellants had the intention to commit murder based on the evidence of eye witnesses and the nature of the assault.
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
