Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 324 IPC for Assault with Sharp Weapon, Reduces Sentence to Period Already Served. Appellant convicted for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon, sentence reduced to period already undergone considering young age and no criminal antecedents.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 14
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Ashish alias Ashotosh Dharamraj Meheshkar, was convicted by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial No. 155/2000 for an offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1000, with default imprisonment of one month. The conviction arose from an incident on 23 January 2000, when the appellant, along with co-accused Jitendra, assaulted the complainant Vijay Pawar with a sharp edged weapon on the chest, causing a bleeding injury. The appellant and complainant were known to each other, and there was prior enmity over a kite-flying dispute during Sankrant festival in 1999. On the date of the incident, the complainant was sitting with friends when the appellant and Jitendra arrived on a Luna moped, abused the complainant, and assaulted him. Jitendra caught hold of the victim while the appellant dealt a blow with a sharp weapon. The complainant lodged a complaint at Civil Lines Police Station, Akola, leading to registration of Crime No. 47/2000 under Section 307 read with 34 IPC. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 324 IPC, a lesser offence. The appellant appealed against the conviction and sentence. The High Court heard the appeal, with the appellant's counsel absent and the state represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor. The court perused the record and found that the medical evidence corroborated the injury, and the conviction was sustainable. However, considering that the appellant was young (20 years) at the time of the incident, had no criminal antecedents, the incident occurred in 2000, and the appeal was pending for 14 years, the court reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. The fine was maintained. The appeal was partly allowed.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Voluntarily Causing Hurt by Dangerous Weapon - Section 324 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction upheld - Appellant assaulted complainant with a sharp edged weapon on chest causing bleeding injury - Medical evidence corroborated - Conviction confirmed (Paras 3-5).

B) Sentencing - Reduction of Sentence - Section 324 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sentence reduced to period already undergone - Appellant was young (20 years) at time of incident, no criminal antecedents, incident occurred in 2000, appeal pending for 14 years - Held that ends of justice would be met by reducing sentence to period already undergone (Para 6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction under Section 324 IPC is sustainable and whether the sentence of two years RI is appropriate.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal partly allowed. Conviction under Section 324 IPC upheld. Sentence reduced to the period already undergone. Fine of Rs. 1000 maintained.

Law Points

  • Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon
  • Section 324 IPC
  • reduction of sentence
  • period already undergone
  • young age
  • no criminal antecedents
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (09) 175

Criminal Appeal No. 508/2003

2017-09-06

Mrs. Swapna Joshi

Mr. S.B. Bissa (Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent)

Ashish alias Ashotosh Dharamraj Meheshkar

State of Maharashtra

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 324 IPC

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal or reduction of sentence

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted and sentenced to two years RI for voluntarily causing hurt by a sharp weapon

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to two years RI and fine of Rs. 1000

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 324 IPC is sustainable on evidence Whether the sentence of two years RI is appropriate

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant's counsel remained absent, no arguments advanced Respondent's counsel supported the conviction and sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction under Section 324 IPC is sustainable as medical evidence corroborates the injury caused by a sharp weapon. However, considering the young age of the appellant, no criminal antecedents, and the long pendency of the appeal, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone to meet the ends of justice.

Judgment Excerpts

This Appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 26.6.2003 passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Sessions Trial No. 155/2000 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ in default, further R.I. for one month. Considering the young age of the appellant, the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, the incident took place in the year 2000 and the appeal is pending since 2003, the ends of justice would be met if the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Akola on 26.6.2003 in Sessions Trial No. 155/2000 under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to two years RI and fine. The appellant filed Criminal Appeal No. 508/2003 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The appeal was heard on 6.9.2017 and disposed of with modification of sentence.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 324, 307, 34
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Compensation in Police Custodial Death Case — State Directed to Pay ₹10 Lakhs for Negligence and Violation of Article 21. Failure to Provide Timely Medical Aid to Detainee Constitutes Custodial Violence ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Sets Aside Land Acquisition Declaration for Violation of Section 5-A Hearing Requirement. Failure to Provide Notice of Hearing Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Renders Section 6 Declaration Invalid.