IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
Jamshed and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 1526 of 2023
Decided On : 04-08-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 506, 354, 354B, 324, 325, 308 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 164, 161, 227 – Offence for rioting – House-trespass after preparation for hurt – Offence for voluntarily causing hurt – Offence for criminal intimidation – Assault – Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or mean – Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt – Discharge application – Attempt to commit culpable homicide – Held, It cannot be held at the stage of framing of charge that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against accused under Section 308 IPC in light of pronouncement of Hon’ble Apex Court as stated above as a charge can also be made against accused on grave suspicion of commission of offence – Prima facie case envisaged for framing of charge is prima facie formation of opinion by trial court that there is sufficient ground to put accused on trial for said charge and not formation of opinion that said material collected during investigation, if proved, during trial, same would be sufficient to convict accused for said charge – Revision dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for the private respondent and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against order dated 1.3.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Baghpat in S.T. No. 344 of 2022 (State vs. Jamshed and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 759 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 506, 354, 354B, 324, 325, 308 IPC, P.S. Badaut, District Baghpat, whereby learned court below has dismissed the discharge application 8B filed by the revisionists.
3. Factual matrix of the case relevant for the purpose of present revision are that informant Irfan lodged an F.I.R. with P.S. concerned on 1.7.2021 at 18:06 hours by filing written report before S.H.O. concerned with averment that on 30.6.2021 at around 10:00 PM he was sitting at his home along with family members, accused persons who harbour enmity with him, prior to the incident and suddenly emerged without any reason armed with sharp edged weapons, clubs and sticks and attacked him with intention to kill. Informant, his son Danish and Amir received serious injuries in the incident. Accused persons had also torn clothes of his wife and daughter and molested them. On hearing cries of informant side, neighbours emerged and thereupon accused persons left the place of incident after giving threat to informant and his family. Injured were examined at C.H.C., Badaut on the date of incident at around 11:00 PM and main injured Amir sustained four injuries which are described as below:
(i) Incised wound of size 4 x 0.5 cm into bone deep. Margin is clear on lateral to left Eyebrow on lt. Side of face. K.U.O. X-ray forehead (skull) Ap-Lat.
(ii) Contusion of size 2 x 1 cm on Rt. Side of face just below Rt. Eye.
(iii) Contused swelling of size 4 x 2 cm on verntral aspect of Rt. Forearm.
(iv) Contused swelling of size 05.0.5 cm on dorsal aspect of Rt. Hand. KUO X-ray Rt. Hand AP-oblique. Duration Fresh.
4. In the opinion of doctor, injury no. 1, kept under observation, which was caused by sharp edged object. Injury no. 4, kept under observation. Injury nos. 2 and 3 were found simple in nature.
4. Injured Irfan suffered three injuries out of which one injury on left shoulder joint, which was kept under observation. Injury was found to be caused by hard and blunt object.
5. Injured Danish Sustained six injuries out of which two injuries were kept under observation and rest were found simple. In X-ray of skull of injured Amir, no bone injury was seen, however, in X-ray of right hand of Amir, fracture on second and fourth of metacarpal bone seen. Doctor prepared supplementary report of injured Amir and termed the injuries of finger of right hand as grievous. In x-ray report of left hand of Irfan, fracture on fifth metacarpal bone was seen. These injuries was found to be grievous. In x-ray report of left hand of injured Danish, fracture in distal end of second metacarpal bone was seen which was found grievous.
6. Injured persons in their statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and aggrieved ladies of the family of the informant Nurnisha and Sazia in their statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. supported the F.I.R. version. Injured Amir in statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that accused persons have attacked him with sharp edged weapons, lathi and danda in which he has suffered injuries on his head and spinal cord and referred to district hospital Baghpat from C.H.C. Badaut for treatment. Independent witnesses also supported the F.I.R. version in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. CT-Scan of head of injured Amir was conducted on 1.7.2021 and concerned doctor/radiologist found a linear fracture involving anterior lateral wall of left maxillary sinus, however, no abnormality was detected, parenchyma.
7. The investigating officer recorded statement of doctor Pravendra Chaurasiya, who conducted MLC of injured persons and submitted supplementary report
SupremeToday
The intention or knowledge of an accused under Section 308 IPC has to be ascertained only prima facie at the stage of charge, based on the injury caused to the victim.
Accused cannot maintain application under Section 128(1)(a), Cr.P.C. for transferring case from Court of Sessions to a Court of Magistrate on the ground that no offence under Section 308, I.P.C. is m....
Point of law: Criminal Law - Culpable homicide – Framing of charges - act done by the accused with intention or knowledge that under such circumstances death could have been caused or not - Whether ....
Criminal Law – Offence of Attempt to commit culpable Homicide - Revision petition – Whether accused had intention or knowledge that injuries inflicted on the victim would cause death and as a result ....
The court determined that at the discharge stage, only a prima facie case is considered, and sufficient evidence of grievous injury justified framing charges under attempted murder.
Intent or knowledge of the accused is essential for framing charges under Section 308 IPC, irrespective of the injury's severity.
An attempt to commit culpable homicide, even if unsuccessful, falls under Section 308 IPC, justifying trial in the Sessions Court.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.