Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 19333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Shiva Markam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1823 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Surfaraj Khan
For the Respondents: Vivek Sharma

An offence under Section 307 IPC requires proof of intent or knowledge to cause death, inferred from the nature of the weapon, the manner of assault, and the body parts targeted, rather than just the resulting injury; however, appellate courts may reduce sentences based on mitigating factors like lack of prior enmity.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code (1860) - Sections 147, 148, 323, 307/149 - Criminal Procedure Code (1973) - Section 313 - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (2023) - Section 415(2) - Attempt to murder - Ingredients of s. 307 - Intention or knowledge of causing death must be established regardless of actual severity of injury - Factors include nature of weapon used, manner of assault and body parts targeted - Appellate court will not interfere with conviction if based on proper appreciation of evidence - Sentence modified where mitigating circumstances exist.

Facts of the case:
An altercation arose during an engagement ceremony when the complainants intervened in a loud dispute involving the appellants. The appellants allegedly attacked the victims with weapons including iron daggers, sticks, and tangis. The trial court convicted the appellants for various offences under the IPC, including attempt to murder, sentencing them to five years imprisonment. The appellants appealed, citing contradictions in witness statements and hostile witnesses.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction observing that the medical evidence and testimonies of the injured witnesses sufficiently established the guilt and intent of the appellants. However, given the absence of previous enmity and the fact that some prosecution witnesses had turned hostile, the sentence was considered excessive.

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 307 IPC was justified and whether the sentence imposed by the trial court requires interference by the appellate court.

Ratio Decidendi: To constitute an offence under Section 307 IPC, the prosecution must prove the intention or knowledge of causing death. The intention is inferred from factors such as the nature of the weapon, the severity of the blows, and the bodily parts injured. Given the evidence, the conviction was maintained, but the sentence was reduced in the interest of justice.

Result: Appeal partly allowed; sentence of imprisonment reduced to three years.

Table of Content
1. summary of trial court conviction and case background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. summary of rival arguments regarding conviction validity and sentence reduction. (Para 5 , 6)
3. analysis of evidentiary testimony and medical reports provided. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. legal requirements and precedents for proving section 307 ipc. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. conclusion reached by court on guilt and modification of sentence. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)

Judgment on Board

1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 415(2) of B.N.S.S. by the appellants against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.07.2025 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Session Trial No. 62/2020, whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as follows:-

Convicted under Section	Sentenced
147 of Indian Penal Code (all the accused/appellants)	S.I. for 6 months & fine of Rs. 300/- in default of fine 15 days S.I. (for all the accused/appellants)
148 of Indian Penal Code (all the accused/appellants)	S.I. for 1 year & fine of Rs. 500/- in default of fine one month S.I. (for all the accused/appellants)
323 of Indian Penal Code (all the accused/appellants)	S.I. for 2 months & fine of Rs. 200/- in default of fine 7 days S.I. (for all the accused/appellants)
307, r/w 149 (3 times) of Indian Penal Code (all the accused/appellants)	S.I. for 5 years (three times) with fine of Rs. 1000/- (three times) and, in default of payment of fine, 3 months S.I. (three times) (for all the accused/appellants)

All sentences run concurrently & fine amount has been deposited

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.07.2020 a report was made by the complainant Smt. Bhagwati Markam against 6 persons with the averment that on 22.07.2020, there was an engagement ceremony at the house of neighbor Devanand Dewar, in which people known to them from Chilhati and Dongargaon had come. At around 9:00pm, they were shouting very loudly. Hearing this, she and her sister’s son Manoj stopped them from shouting. The co-accused persons hearing this assaulted Manoj and upon getting information about the incident, her son Dharmendra and her sister’s son Suraj came out of the house asking why Manoj was beaten up, then suddenly the co-accused Bhima, Vikas, Devkaran, Shiva, Dev Kumar, Raj all with iron daggers, tangi and sticks attacked her son Dharmendra and her sister’s sons Manoj and Suraj with the intention of killing them. Due to which Dharmendra got injured on his forehead and near his left elbow, head and forehead and Manoj got injured in his stomach. When she came to know about the incident and went to intervene, they beat her too, due to which she got injured in her right arm and stomach. During the fight, the complainant saw the appellants Bhima Dewar had an iron dagger, Dev Kumar a stick and Raj Telasi a stick. Jyoti, Preeti and Salma saw and heard the incident. On the said complaint of the complainant, the Dongargaon Police Station, District Rajnandgaon has registered a case under Crime No. 128/2020, sections 147, 148, 323/149, 307/149 of IPC against the accused Bhima, Vikas, Devkaran, Shiva, Devkumar and Raj. After completion of investigation, the appellants have been arrested. The charge-sheet was filed for the aforesaid offences against the appellants / accused before the competent Court against the appellants.

3. In order to bring home the above-stated offences, the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellants were recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, in which they denied their guilt and have taken the stand that they have been falsely implicated in this case.

4. The learned First Additional Session Judge, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on record vide judgment dated 23.07.2025, convicted the appellants for the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 19333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURArvind Kumar Verma, JShiva Markam – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentCRA No. 1823 of 2025

Cases Referred (4)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Shiva Markam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRA No. 1823 of 2025