Conviction under Section 307 IPC requires established intention or knowledge to commit murder; a single blow causing a simple injury on a vital part, without evidence of further attempts, warrants modification of conviction to Section 324 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

By Court:- Heard Mr. Mayank Mridul, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Fahad Allam, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 02.07.2009 and order of sentence dated 06.07.2009 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial No. 277 of 2005, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been held guilty for the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. of five years.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 06.01.1996 in the night, the informant along with one Sakaldeo Bedia was working in his Khalihan and at about 9:30 P.M., his father Dasai Karmali (P.W.-1) came there and asked him to go to the house. Then the informant told his father to go ahead and he was coming later on. His father proceeded and soon thereafter, informant and Sakaldeo Bedia also proceeded. It has further been alleged that when his father reached near the house of Jagdish Munda, accused Jagdish Munda, his son Ram Dayal Munda, Lunda Munda, his both wives and his daughter Munia Kumari surrounded Dasai Karmali and started assaulting him. Accused Jagdish Munda assaulted his father with lathi and his father fell down. Thereafter, accused Ram Dayal Munda inflicted farsa blow on the head of Dasai Karmali. Other accused persons also assaulted him with lathi. The informant and Sakaldeo Bedia ran to rescue Dasai Karmali, in the meantime, nearby people also assembled there and accused persons fled away from there. Thereafter, injured was brought to Central Workshop Hospital, Patratu for treatment. The reason behind the occurrence is old land dispute.

4. On the basis of above fardbeyan, FIR being Patratu P.S. Case No. 7 of 1996 was registered against the accused persons for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 342, 326 and 307 of the I.P.C. and after investigation, charge sheet was submitted under the aforesaid Sections against the six accused persons, out of whom one Somari Devi died, as such, her name was deleted. After taking cognizance of the offence, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions; where S.T. No. 277 of 2005 was registered. The charge for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 342, 326 and 307 of the I.P.C. were framed against the appellant and others and read over and explained to them, to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In course of trial, the prosecution has examined altogether 11 witnesses and also adduced following documentary evidence:-

Exhibit-1 : Injury Report of Dasai Karmali.

Exhibit- 2 : Signature of RO & AC, I/c Barkakana O.P. Camp, Central Workshop Hospital, Barkakana on fardbeyan.

6. On the other hand, no oral or documentary evidence has been adduced by the defence.

7. After conclusion of trial, the learned trial court, after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence available on record, has convicted and sentenced the appellant, as stated above, which is assailed in this appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. is absolutely unwarranted under law as the factual scenario clearly depicts that the ingredients of Section 307 I.P.C. is absolutely lacking in this case. There was single blow injury caused