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

2024 Supreme(MP) 790

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
PREM NARAYAN SINGH, J.
 
Sumit - Appellant
Versus 
The State of Madhya Pradesh - Respondents 
Criminal Appeal No. 9935 of 2024
Decided On : 23-12-2024
 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Navendu Joshi, learned counsel.
For the Respondents:Shri Surendra Gupta, learned Govt. Advocate.

To establish an offense under Section 307 IPC, proof of intent to kill is required; a single injury does not suffice to conclude such intent, allowing for conviction under Section 326 IPC instead.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307 and 450 - Conviction for attempted murder and house trespass - Appellant convicted for four years and two years rigorous imprisonment, with fines - Incident involved a stabbing during a dispute over payment for milk - The court emphasized the testimony of the injured complainant, establishing presence at the scene and reliability of evidence - Conviction under Section 307 set aside, replaced with Section 326 due to lack of intent to kill - Court acknowledged no prior criminal history of appellant and his status as a sole breadwinner. (Paras 1, 6, 29)

(B) Witness Credibility - The court upheld that the testimony of the injured complainant carries special weight and cannot be disregarded solely based on witness relationships or minor discrepancies. (Paras 13, 19)

(C) Legal Interpretation - The court clarified that to establish an offence under Section 307, the prosecution must demonstrate intent to kill, which was not present in this case. (Paras 22, 25)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, known to the complainant, stabbed him during an altercation over payment for milk, resulting in a single injury that required medical treatment. The prosecution produced ten witnesses, with the injured complainant's testimony being central to the case. (Paras 2, 10, 20)

Findings of Court:
The evidence substantiated that the complainant sustained grievous injuries due to the appellant's actions. The court acknowledged that despite the relationship of witnesses, their testimonies corroborated the incident. (Paras 20, 21)

Issues: The primary legal questions were whether the inference of intention to murder could be drawn from a single blow inflicted by the appellant and the appropriate conviction based on evidence presented. (Paras 9, 25)

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that mere infliction of a single injury does not suffice to establish the intent to commit murder as required by Section 307. It considered the nature of the injury and concluded that the conviction should instead be under Section 326 for causing grievous hurt. (Paras 22, 26)

Result: Conviction under Section 307 is set aside; appellant convicted under Section 326 with a sentence of three years R.I., alongside a fine. Sentences under Section 450 confirmed. (Paras 29, 30)

Table of Content
1. criminal appeal initiated. (Para 1)
2. factual background of the case detailing the incident. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. trial court's judgment and conviction noted. (Para 5)
4. arguments for appeal: innocence and severity of sentence. (Para 6 , 7)
5. opposition by the state to the appeal. (Para 8)
6. central question for determination in the appeal. (Para 9)
7. eyewitness testimonies and their corroboration discussed. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
8. arguments regarding reliability of witness testimonies. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
9. medical evidence supports prosecution's claim. (Para 20)
10. assessment of intent regarding the appellant's actions. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
11. final assessment of charges and conviction. (Para 25 , 26)
12. sentencing and conviction adjustments detailed. (Para 28 , 29)
13. fine and compensation outlined. (Para 30 , 31)
14. administrative and procedural aspects of the judgment. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)

JUDGMENT :

PREM NARAYAN SINGH, J.

This criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellants being disgruntled by the judgment dated 13.08.2024, passed by the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, District Ratlam, in Sessions Trial No.110/2023, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offence under Sections 307 & 450 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and sentenced for 04 years R.I. & 02 years R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000/- & Rs.1,000/- and default stipulations.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows that the complainant Hariom Porwal (PW-1) resides in village Berchha and his milk dairy shop is named as "Hariom Doodh Dairy". The appellant Sumit used to come to the complainant's shop to deliver milk, owing to which, complainant knew the appellant. On 06.01.2023, at around 09:30 pm, the complainant (PW-1) was selling milk at his milk shop, when the appellant- Sumit came to his shop, he was in intoxicating condition on motorcyle and he started to abuse him. While doing so, he asked to give milk. When the complainant asked for money after giving him milk, the appellant said that he did not recognize him and after buying milk he did not pay money. Again complainant asked for money, on which, appellant forcibly took milk from the complainant and threatened to kill him without giving money. After sometime, the appellant came into his shop and while abusing the complainant, stabbed him with a knife on his stomach. Due to which, he got injured and bleeding was started. At that time, complainant raised a noise, and people nearby the shop, came there and appellant/Sumit ran away from there on his motorcycle. Doctor Sanjay from his clinic located near the complainant’s shop, had given first aid to the complainant and when brother Rajesh of the complainant came to know about the incident, he reached on his shop and took the complainant to the hospital by auto. Wherein he was admitted and treated. Thereafter, the complainant has made a complaint. Upon the said report, Police Station Industrial Area, District Ratlam lodged an FIR at Crime No.14/2023 for the offence U/s 294, 324, 327, 458 & 506 of IPC.

3. The police after following the due procedure, prepared the spot map, taken the statements of the witnesses, seized the articles, prepared the medical documents, arrested the accused persons and after due investigation, filed the charge-sheet under Sections 458 , 327, 294, 324, 506, 307 & 329 of IPC. The matter was committed to the Court of Sessions and made over to the learned Trial Court where upon the charges are framed under Sections 294 , 458, 327, 329, 307 & 506 (Part-II) of IPC. The appellant abjured his guilt and took a plea that he had been falsely implicated and prayed for trial.

4. The prosecution on its behalf has examined as many as 10 witnesses namely Sumit [sic] Hariom, complainant (PW-1), Rajesh Porwal, brother of the complainant (PW-2), Laxminarayan (PW-3), Gourav Anand Sharma (PW-4), Sanjay Sharma, Doctor (PW-5), Ajay (PW-6), Vikas (P

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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