Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Dayanand S/o Makkanna Patil, was convicted by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar, sitting at Basavakalyan, in S.C.No.189/2014 for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 333 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs.1,000/- for Section 504 IPC, and imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs.25,000/- for Section 333 IPC. The appellant filed a criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to set aside the conviction and acquit him. The case arose from an incident where the complainant, a police constable, alleged that the appellant insulted him and caused grievous hurt while he was on duty. The High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, heard the appeal. The court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses. It found that the evidence was inconsistent and unreliable. The complainant's version was not corroborated by independent witnesses, and the medical evidence did not conclusively prove grievous hurt. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of Sections 504 and 333 IPC beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Assault on Public Servant - Section 333 IPC - Grievous Hurt - Prosecution must prove that the victim was a public servant acting in discharge of duty and that the accused caused grievous hurt - In the present case, the evidence of the complainant and other witnesses was inconsistent and unreliable regarding the nature of injuries and the incident - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of Section 333 IPC beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Intentional Insult - Section 504 IPC - Intentional Insult with Intent to Provoke Breach of Peace - The prosecution must establish that the accused intentionally insulted the victim and thereby provoked breach of peace - In the absence of credible evidence regarding the alleged insult and the circumstances, the conviction under Section 504 IPC is unsustainable - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence under Section 504 IPC (Paras 10-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 504 and 333 of IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.08.2016 and 25.08.2016 passed by the II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Bidar, sitting at Basavakalyan in S.C.No.189/2014 are set aside. The appellant/accused No.1 is acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 333 of IPC.
Law Points
- Ingredients of Section 333 IPC require proof of grievous hurt to a public servant while discharging duty
- Section 504 IPC requires intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution evidence is inconsistent and unreliable
