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

1994 Supreme(Ori) 186

High Court Of Orissa
S. K. MOHANTY, R. K. PATRA
GANGADHAR BEHIDAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - Respondent
Criminal Revision 312  Of  1988
Decided On : 11/21/1994

Advocates Appeared:
A.K.Mishra, Debasis Panda, P.C.ROUT, S.B.JANE, S.K.DAS GUPTA

In order to establish an offense under Section 307 of the IPC, the prosecution must prove that the accused's act was done with the intention or knowledge that it would have amounted to murder if death had resulted.

Headnote:

ATTEMPT TO MURDER - SECTION 307 OF IPC - INTERPRETATION - CONVICTION UNDER SECTION 307 OF IPC - REQUISITES - INTENTION OR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ACCUSED - PROOF - CASE LAW DISCUSSED.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for stabbing the victim on the left side of the chest with a knife, causing a simple injury. The petitioner challenged the conviction, arguing that the offense should have been classified as Section 324 of the IPC (causing hurt with a dangerous weapon) instead.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the prosecution failed to establish the petitioner's intention or knowledge that his act would have amounted to murder. The court considered the nature of the injury, the circumstances of the assault, and the lack of evidence regarding the petitioner's motive or intent to kill the victim.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner's act of stabbing the victim with a knife constituted an attempt to murder under Section 307 of the IPC. 2. Whether the prosecution had sufficiently established the petitioner's intention or knowledge that his act would have resulted in the victim's death.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 307 of the IPC, emphasizing that the prosecution must prove that the accused's act was done with the intention or knowledge that it would have amounted to murder if death had resulted. 2. The court held that the nature of the injury alone is not sufficient to establish the offense under Section 307 of the IPC. Other factors, such as the circumstances of the assault, the motive of the accused, and the severity of the injury, must also be considered.

Final Decision: The court allowed the revision petition in part, altering the conviction from Section 307 to Section 324 of the IPC. The petitioner was sentenced to six months of rigorous imprisonment under Section 324.

R. K. PATRA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner and two of his associates were tried on Charges under Ss. 149/307, 149/323 and 380/34 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'ipc'), in Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Sambalpur. The learned Trial Judge acquit ted petitioner's associates under S. 232, Cr. P. C. He did not find the petitioner guilty of the offences under Ss. 149/323 and 380/34 of IPC. The petitioner was, however, found guilty under S. 307 of IPC and convicted thereunder. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Against the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner pre ferred appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur which ended in dismissal. Hence this revision.

( 2 ) WHILE admitting, this revision, this Court by order dated 20-7-1987 issued notice to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why the sentence shall not be enhanced.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that on 4-12-1982 at about 5 p. m. a Matador F. C. vehicle came from Sambalpur side and stopped on the main road of village Thalkuli. About 20 to 25 persons between the age group of 20 to 30 years including the petitioner got down from the vehicle. They were armed with deadly weapons like knives, iron rods and thengas. They first surrounded Bhagirathi (P. W. 1), Arjun (P. W. 3), Sudhansu (P. W. 4), Bharat (P. W. 5), Nirakar (P. W. 10) and some others who were standing near a hotel and started assaulting them. Out of fear of life, the victims ran helter skelter. In that process P. Ws. 1 and 4 entered inside a nearby grocery shop. Some of the culprits forcibly entered inside the shop and pulled out P. Ws. 1 and 4. It is the allegation of the prosecution that the petitioner by means of a knife held by him dealt a blow on the left side chest of P. W. 1. Another culprit assaulted P. W. 4 by means of iron rod. As a result of such assault, both P. Ws. 1 and 4 fell down. The culprits thereafter left the place of occurrence. P. W. 4 lodged FIR at Jharsuguda police station at about 5 -45 p. m. on the same day.

( 4 ) THE plea of the petitioner was one of denial.

( 5 ) THE conviction of the petitioner is based on the evidence of the injured (P. W. 1) and P. W. 3 (eye witness) and the evidence of the doctor, P. W. 7.

( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner first con tended that the conviction under S. 307 of IPC cannot be sustained in view of the discrepancy in the evidence. P. W. 7 is the doctor who examined P. W. 1 on police requisition on the date of occurrence at about 7-15 p. m. Ext. 5 is the injury report. We may at this stage note the perfunctory manner in which the learned Assistant Sessions Judge recorded the evidence of the doctor. By merely marking the injury report as Ext. 5 he remained satisfied without eliciting evidence from the doctor in respect of the injury. The contents of Ext. 5 should have been put through the mouth of the doctor P. W. 7 which the learned Assistant Sessions Judge has failed to do. The injury report Ext. 5 shows that P. W. 1 had sustained the following injuries on his person. "1. One lacerated injury scalp. 1-3" margins irregular and gaping. 2. One incised wound 1-3/4 " margins clean cut without bruising. Tails off anteriorly on vertex of head simple may have been caused by some hard blunt object on left side of chest in 4th intercestal space on anterior axillary Line. Simple may have been caused by some cutting instrument. "p. W. 1 has testified that on the date of occurrence between 4 to 5 p. m. he along with P. W. 4, P. W. 5 and others took tea in a hotel at Thalkuli bus stand crossing. After taking tea some of his friends left the hotel whereas he was sitting in a nearby cloth store. At that time he noticed, a Matador came from Samblpur side and went towards Jharsagudia. Af ter a few minutes that vehicle came back and halted near the bus stand crossing. About 20 to 25 persons armed with iron rods, lathis, thujalis and knives got down from the vehicle and rushed towards











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