Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 326 IPC for Causing Grievous Hurt by Setting Victim on Fire. The court found that the dying declaration was reliable and the act constituted grievous hurt, but not murder, as the intention to cause death was not proved.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 15
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Prakash Sadu Raut, was convicted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for causing grievous hurt to Ranjana (also known as Sakhubai) by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. The incident occurred on 17 February 1991, following a history of intimacy between the appellant and the deceased, which had soured due to pressure from her sons. The appellant, along with his sister and brother-in-law, allegedly went to the deceased's house, quarreled, and set her on fire. The deceased sustained 95% burn injuries and died five days later. The trial court acquitted the appellant of murder under Section 302 IPC but convicted him under Section 326 IPC, sentencing him to three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, the High Court examined the dying declarations made by the deceased to her son, the police, and a Special Executive Magistrate, finding them consistent and reliable. The court held that the act of setting a person on fire causing grievous hurt was established, but the prosecution failed to prove the intention to cause death necessary for murder. The conviction under Section 326 IPC was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Grievous Hurt - Section 326 IPC - Conviction for causing grievous hurt by pouring kerosene and setting on fire - The appellant was convicted under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous hurt to the deceased by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire, resulting in 95% burns and eventual death - The court upheld the conviction, finding that the dying declaration was reliable and the act constituted grievous hurt, but not murder as the intention to cause death was not established (Paras 1-18).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant's conviction under Section 326 IPC is sustainable when the victim died of burn injuries, and whether the dying declaration was reliable.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed. Conviction under Section 326 IPC and sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000 upheld.

Law Points

  • Section 326 IPC
  • grievous hurt
  • intention to cause death
  • dying declaration
  • burn injuries
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Section 34 IPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (04) 81

Criminal Appeal No.121 of 1993

2013-04-01

Abhay M. Thipsay

Ms. Jyoti Menon i/b. Mr. M. Janardhan for the Appellant, Ms. V.S. Mhaispurkr APP for the State

Prakash Sadu Raut

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous hurt by setting a person on fire.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal from conviction under Section 326 IPC.

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted by the trial court under Section 326 IPC and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment.

Previous Decisions

Trial court acquitted appellant of murder under Section 302 IPC but convicted under Section 326 IPC.

Issues

Whether the dying declaration was reliable and sufficient to sustain conviction under Section 326 IPC. Whether the act of setting a person on fire resulting in death constitutes murder or grievous hurt.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the dying declaration was not reliable and that the conviction under Section 326 IPC was unsustainable. State argued that the dying declaration was consistent and the appellant's act caused grievous hurt.

Ratio Decidendi

The dying declaration of the deceased, recorded by multiple authorities, was consistent and reliable. The act of pouring kerosene and setting a person on fire causing 95% burns constitutes grievous hurt under Section 326 IPC, but not murder, as the intention to cause death was not established beyond reasonable doubt.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant and two others were prosecuted on the allegation of having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 34 thereof. Ranjana, who had sustained 95% burn injuries succumbed to the injuries early in the morning of 22.2.1991.

Procedural History

The appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, BrihanMumbai, who acquitted him of murder under Section 302 IPC but convicted him under Section 326 IPC. The appellant appealed to the High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 326, 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 326 IPC for Causing Grievous Hurt by Setting Victim on Fire. The court found that the dying declaration was reliable and the act constituted grievous hurt, but not murder, as the intention to cause d...
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Allows Transfer of Family Suit on Consent of Parties — No Objection by Respondent. Transfer of Family Suit No.15 of 2025 from Family Court, Kheda to Family Court, Ahmedabad allowed without expressing opinion on merits.