Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal by the accused-appellant, Omanakutten, against his conviction under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for pouring acid on the victim, Sunil Kumar (PW-1), on 26 November 1997. The incident occurred on a public road where the appellant, along with his wife, poured acid from a ridge, causing extensive burns on the victim's head, neck, shoulder, and other parts. The victim was hospitalized for over three months. The trial court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to one year simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000. The conviction was upheld by the Sessions Court and the Kerala High Court. The Supreme Court granted leave and issued notice on the question of sentence enhancement. The appellant argued that the injuries did not constitute grievous hurt under Section 320 IPC because the victim did not state he was in severe pain for 20 days and the doctor testified the victim could carry on daily activities. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, holding that the extensive acid burns and prolonged hospitalization clearly fell under clauses 'Sixthly' (permanent disfiguration of head or face) and 'Eighthly' (hurt causing severe bodily pain or inability to follow ordinary pursuits for 20 days) of Section 320 IPC. The court noted that the victim's testimony that he could not perform daily routines during hospitalization was unchallenged, and the trial court observed permanent disfigurement. The court affirmed that acid is a corrosive substance under Section 326 IPC. Regarding sentence, the court found the one-year term inadequate but declined to enhance it due to the passage of 22 years and the appellant's age (63). The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Grievous Hurt - Acid Attack - Sections 320, 326 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Interpretation of 'grievous hurt' - The victim suffered extensive acid burns on left side of body, hospitalized for over 50 days. Court held that such injuries fall under clauses 'Sixthly' (permanent disfiguration of head or face) and 'Eighthly' (hurt causing severe bodily pain or inability to follow ordinary pursuits for 20 days) of Section 320 IPC, even if doctor stated victim could carry on daily affairs with aid. The act of pouring acid constitutes use of corrosive substance under Section 326 IPC. (Paras 10-10.1) B) Criminal Law - Sentence - Adequacy - Section 326 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Enhancement of sentence - The trial court sentenced accused to one year simple imprisonment and fine. Supreme Court noted sentence was inadequate but declined to enhance due to incident occurring 22 years ago and accused being 63 years old. (Paras 6, 12) C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Concurrent Findings - Scope of Interference - The Supreme Court found no infirmity or perversity in concurrent findings of fact by lower courts and High Court, and upheld conviction. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the injuries caused by acid attack constitute grievous hurt under Section 320 IPC, and whether the sentence of one year simple imprisonment is adequate or requires enhancement.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; conviction under Section 326 IPC and sentence of one year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000 upheld; no enhancement of sentence.
Law Points
- Grievous hurt under Section 320 IPC includes permanent disfiguration of head or face and any hurt causing severe bodily pain or inability to follow ordinary pursuits for 20 days
- acid is a corrosive substance under Section 326 IPC
- concurrent findings of fact not interfered with unless perverse
- sentence enhancement not warranted due to passage of time and age of accused.
