Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 326 IPC for Grievous Hurt with Iron Rod. Acquittal for Murder Attains Finality as State Does Not Appeal.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Suresh Prakashbhan Junghare, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 383/2014 for an offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 years and a fine of Rs.5,000, with default simple imprisonment for 6 months. The appellant challenged this conviction by way of criminal appeal before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The prosecution case was that on 24.05.2014, the appellant assaulted one Sukhram Jagan Ramteke with an iron rod, causing injuries. Initially, a charge under Section 302 IPC (murder) was framed, but the trial court acquitted the appellant of murder and convicted him under Section 326 IPC (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapon). The State did not appeal against the acquittal under Section 302 IPC, so that part became final. The appellant argued that the conviction under Section 326 IPC was not sustainable. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was not perverse. The court noted that the appellant had caused grievous hurt with a dangerous weapon, and the conviction under Section 326 IPC was justified. The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Grievous Hurt by Dangerous Weapon - Section 326 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction for causing grievous hurt with iron rod - The appellant was charged with murder under Section 302 IPC but acquitted thereof, which attained finality as State did not appeal. The trial court convicted him under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous hurt with a dangerous weapon. The High Court upheld the conviction, finding no perversity in the trial court's appreciation of evidence. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable on the basis of evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence under Section 326 IPC upheld

Law Points

  • Section 326 IPC
  • grievous hurt by dangerous weapon
  • acquittal for murder
  • finality of acquittal
  • appeal against conviction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (12) 147

Criminal Appeal No.449/2018

2018-12-07

V. M. Deshpande

Mr. A. K. Bhangde for appellant, Mr. N. S. Rao, A.P.P. for respondent

Suresh s/o Prakashbhan Junghare

State of Maharashtra through Police Station Officer, Yashodhara Nagar, Nagpur

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

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction under Section 326 IPC

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought setting aside of conviction and sentence under Section 326 IPC

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted by trial court for causing grievous hurt with iron rod

Previous Decisions

Trial court acquitted appellant of murder under Section 302 IPC (not appealed by State) and convicted under Section 326 IPC

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 326 IPC is sustainable on evidence

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that conviction under Section 326 IPC is not sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The trial court's appreciation of evidence was not perverse; the appellant caused grievous hurt with a dangerous weapon (iron rod), justifying conviction under Section 326 IPC.

Judgment Excerpts

By the present appeal, the appellant is challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 383/2014 for which the Court below has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and directed that he shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months.

Procedural History

The appellant was charged under Section 302 IPC for murder. Trial court acquitted him of murder but convicted under Section 326 IPC. State did not appeal acquittal. Appellant appealed conviction.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 326
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Gujarat Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Advertisement Expenses Classification Case. ITAT's finding that advertisement expenses are revenue expenses upheld as per Supreme Court precedent.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 326 IPC for Grievous Hurt with Iron Rod. Acquittal for Murder Attains Finality as State Does Not Appeal.