Case Note & Summary
The revision-petitioner, Sanjay alias Handi, challenged his conviction under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for robbery with hurt. The case arose from an incident on the night of 17-12-1991, when the complainant's wife caught the accused stealing articles from an almirah in their house. The accused gave her two fist blows, and when the complainant intervened, the accused inflicted a knife blow on his shoulder, causing a bleeding injury. Neighbors caught the accused and handed him over to the police. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, 6th Court, Nagpur, initially charged the accused under Section 458 IPC but later altered the charge to Section 394 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty. The trial court convicted him and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for eighteen months and a fine of Rs. 300, with default imprisonment. The convict appealed to the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction. In revision, the High Court considered the arguments of the applicant's counsel, who contended that the property was not produced before the court. However, the High Court found that the concurrent findings of the courts below were based on credible evidence, including the testimony of the complainant and his wife, and the medical evidence of the injury. The court held that the offence under Section 394 IPC was made out as the accused voluntarily caused hurt while committing or attempting to commit robbery. The revision was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Robbery - Section 394 IPC - Housebreaking and Attempted Robbery - The accused was convicted for committing housebreaking and attempting to commit robbery, and in the course of such attempt, voluntarily causing hurt to the complainant by inflicting a knife blow. The trial court and appellate court concurrently found the prosecution case proved based on eyewitness testimony and medical evidence. The High Court in revision declined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the applicant under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code for housebreaking and attempted robbery with voluntarily causing hurt is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, 6th Court, Nagpur and confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur are upheld.
Law Points
- Section 394 IPC
- robbery
- housebreaking
- voluntarily causing hurt
- conviction
- revision
- concurrent findings
