Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sanjay Gaonkar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panaji, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly attempting to murder the victim, Shakuntala @ Sakhu, by assaulting her with a stone on 29 December 2010. The prosecution alleged that the accused hit the victim on her face, head, and eye, causing grievous injuries. The trial court sentenced him to five years of imprisonment and a fine of ₹20,000. The appellant challenged the conviction before the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The High Court heard the appeal and examined the evidence, including the testimony of 16 witnesses, medical certificates, and the complaint filed by the victim's father, Ganesh (PW-1). The court noted that the only eyewitness did not support the prosecution's case, and the victim's testimony was the primary evidence. The medical evidence showed that the victim sustained a fracture of the nasal bone and injuries to the eye, but the doctor opined that there was no danger to life and the injuries were not on vital parts. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had the intention to kill the victim, as required under Section 307 IPC. The court emphasized that the nature of injuries and the absence of any threat to life indicated that the accused did not intend to cause death. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 IPC - Intention to Kill - The court examined whether the prosecution proved that the accused had the intention to kill the victim when he assaulted her with a stone. The victim sustained injuries on her face, head, and eye, but the medical evidence showed that the injuries were not on vital parts and were not sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The court held that the intention to kill was not established, and the conviction under Section 307 IPC was set aside. (Paras 4, 10-15) B) Evidence - Medical Evidence - Nature of Injuries - The court relied on the medical certificates and testimony of doctors to determine the nature and severity of injuries. The injuries were grievous but not life-threatening, and the doctor opined that there was no danger to life. The court held that the absence of injuries on vital parts and the opinion of the doctor negated the intention to kill. (Paras 10-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Prosecution succeeded in proving that the accused assaulted the victim with the intention to kill?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant of the offence under Section 307 IPC.
Law Points
- Section 307 IPC
- Attempt to murder
- Intention to kill
- Nature of injuries
- Vital parts
- Acquittal
