The judgment establishes that the intention of the accused and the circumstances of the act are pivotal in determining the offense under Section 307 I.P.C., and the nature of the injuries alone is not decisive.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, learned amicus curiae for the appellant and Shri S.K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present jail appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 27.02.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Session Trial No. 277/2017, crime No. 390/2016, under Sections 452/307/504/506 I.P.C., P.S. Hastinapur, District Meerut whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 307 I.P.C. to undergo seven years simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/-, under Section 452 I.P.C. to undergo two years of simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/-, under Section 504 I.P.C. to undergo two years of simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 506 I.P.C. to undergo two years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/-, with default provisions.

3. The prosecution case as per the written report is that the brother-in-law of Raju son of the informant Kanwar Pal came since few days to do the agricultural work. Santram (accused-appellant) who is from the village of the informant and is a scoundrel person by threatening to Raju, he used to take money for drinking liquor. Today on 21.10.2016 in the evening Santram demanded money for liquor and when Raju did not gave money, then Sant Ram threatened him to teach a lesson. After sometime at around 6:20 PM, Raju, the complainant and his son Kanwar Pal were talking inside the house, then Sant Ram came abusing inside the house with a knife in his hand forcibly and by telling that he will not leave Raju alive today, he after catching hold of Raju with an intent to kill attacked from knife in his abdomen. In a pursuit to save by the complainant, the second blow was inflicted by the appellant in the stomach of Raju and as a result thereof his intestine came out. While raising alarm, the complainant tried to catch, the accused Santram turned and ran hurriedly and in this process, in the iron gate his head crushed, still he ran away. Raju was taken from ambulance. After this a written report given by the complainant Vijay Pal and on the basis of that chik F.I.R. was registered on the same day.

4. The injured Raju was examined at Community Health Centre, Hastinapur, Meerut. He received incised wound 9 cm x 2 cm depth on the left side of abdomen, 12 cm below left nipple. The second injury was also an incised wound 2 cm x 5 cm, bone depth right side of chest 13 cm below right nipple. These injuries were kept under observation. Doctor opined that the injury caused by a sharp edged object and bleeding was fresh. A supplementary report was prepared wherein x-ray of chest and ultrasound were done which were found to be normal. The investigating officer after taking examination of the prosecution witnesses prepared the site plan and after completing the investigation has submitted the charge sheet under Section 452/307/504/506 I.P.C. Learned trial court vide order dated 21.06.2017 has framed the charges on the appellant-accused under Section 452/307/504/506 I.P.C.

5. PW-1 in his examination-in-chief has reiterated the prosecution version written in the written report clearly stating that Santram with a knife in his hand came inside the house and with an intent to kill caused two blows on the stomach of Raju and prior to that on the same day i.e. 21.10.2016 Santram demanded money from Raju for drinking liquor and when Raju refused to pay, Santram after extending threats went away. In the cross, he has stated that he had not seen Santram abusing and threatening Raju. He has also stated that money was not demanded in front of him. It has been further stated that the incident took place in his house and when he came out from the house he saw Santram running after assaulting Raju with knife, however, had not seen Santram stabbing Raju. He has further stated that apart from him and his son there was no one else.

6. PW-2 is Raju (injured witness) has stated that on 21.10.2016 in the evening Santram demanded money from him for dri