Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Suresh Pandurang Kale, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur in Session Trial No.47/2007 for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (attempt to murder) and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.300. The incident occurred on 18 January 2007, when the victim Satish was assaulted with a shaving blade near a shop, sustaining three incised wounds on the face and neck. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The prosecution examined fourteen witnesses, but four panch witnesses and one alleged eyewitness (PW4 Gajanan Dahikar) turned hostile. The key eyewitness (PW3 Raju, brother of the victim) did not name the appellant in the FIR and only identified him in court after being prompted by the prosecutor. The medical evidence showed injuries that were not life-threatening. The High Court found that the identification of the appellant was unreliable, as the FIR did not name the assailant and the eyewitness's testimony was inconsistent. The court also held that the nature of injuries and the weapon used did not indicate an intention to cause death, thus the offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction under Section 307 IPC, and acquitted the appellant of that charge. However, the court convicted the appellant under Section 324 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons) and sentenced him to the period already undergone (about 1 year and 5 months) and a fine of Rs.300.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Identification of Accused - The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was the assailant, as the sole eyewitness (PW3) did not name the appellant in the FIR and only identified him in court after prompting, while other witnesses turned hostile. Held that conviction cannot be based on such weak identification evidence (Paras 6-8). B) Criminal Law - Attempt to Murder - Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Intention - The nature of injuries (incised wounds on face and neck) did not necessarily indicate an intention to cause death, and the weapon used (shaving blade) was not lethal. Held that the offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out, and at best the appellant could be convicted under Section 324 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record, particularly when the key eyewitness turned hostile and the identification of the appellant is doubtful.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed in part. Conviction under Section 307 IPC set aside. Appellant convicted under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to the period already undergone (about 1 year and 5 months) and fine of Rs.300, in default to undergo RI for two months.
Law Points
- Section 307 IPC requires proof of intention to cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death
- identification of accused must be beyond reasonable doubt
- benefit of doubt must be given to accused when prosecution evidence is unreliable
