Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 38759
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH, J
Sumit – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRA 9935/2024
Navendu Joshi,Advocate General
The court ruled that a single stab wound did not indicate intent to kill, leading to a conviction under Section 326 instead of Section 307 IPC.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 307 and 450 - Criminal appeal challenging conviction for attempted murder and house trespass - Appellant convicted and sentenced to 4 years R.I. for Section 307 and 2 years R.I. for Section 450 with fines - Court found single stab wound insufficient for attempted murder, reducing conviction to Section 326 - Prior relationship between parties noted, and evidence from injured witness upheld. (Paras 1, 2, 5, 26, 29)
(B) Evidence - Testimony of injured witness - The credibility of an injured witness is accorded special status in law, as they have sustained injuries at the time and place of occurrence, lending support to their testimony. (Paras 13, 20)
(C) Discrepancies in witness statements - Minor discrepancies do not necessarily impair the credibility of witnesses unless they are material. (Paras 14, 19)
Facts of the case:
The appellant, known to the complainant, assaulted him during a milk transaction, resulting in a stab wound. The appellant was convicted based on the complainant's testimony and medical evidence. (Paras 2, 5)
Findings of Court:
The appellant's conviction under Section 307 was set aside, and he was convicted under Section 326 instead, with a sentence of 3 years R.I. (Paras 29, 30)
Issues: Whether the trial court's findings regarding conviction and punishment were incorrect. (Paras 9)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the single stab wound did not demonstrate intent to kill, thus warranting a conviction under Section 326 instead of Section 307. (Paras 24, 29)
Result: The appeal was partly allowed, and the conviction for Section 307 was set aside, with a conviction under Section 326. (Paras 29)
JUDGMENT
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, Disrict 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 (PW-7), Kailash Saini, A.S.I./Investigating Officer (PW-8), Dr. Abhishek Arora, Doctor (PW-9), Raisingh Rawat, Sub-Inspector (PW-10) have been adduced in defence by the appellant. No witness has been produced in defence by the appellant.
5. Learned trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence and argument adduced by the parties, pronounced the impugned judgment on 13.08.2024 and finally concluded the case and convicted the appellant for commission of the said offence under the provisions of Sections 307 & 450 of IPC while acquitting them from the charges under Sections 294, 506 (Part-II), 327 & 329 of IPC .
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and the learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant wrongly without considering the evidence available on record. He further submits that in this case single blow was caused on the stomach of the injured. As per the MLC report (Ex.P-10), only one injury (stab would
