Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 1025 of 2002
PETITIONER:
Sattan Sahani
RESPONDENT:
State of Bihar & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/10/2002
BENCH:
S. RAJENDRA BABU & P. VENKATARAMA REDDI.
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
RAJENDRA BABU : J. :
Leave granted.
On being convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (for short
’IPC’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years,
the appellant preferred an appeal. The High Court held that the conviction of the
appellant should be under Section 326 IPC and not 307 IPC and the sentence
was modified to 3 years rigorous imprisonment. In reaching this conclusion, the
High Court, after analysing the evidence, held as under :-
"that appellant Sattan Sahani along with other co-accused formed an
unlawful assembly, entered into the house of the informant and assaulted
the injured witnesses including P.W. 1, Malhu Shahani. Though Malhu
was given ’Bhala’ blow in his abdomen by appellant No. 3, Sattan Sahani
causing penetrating wound, but it appears that he had no intention to kill
him because he had given only one blow. As such, offence attracts
conviction under Section 326 of the Code for voluntarily causing grievous
hurt by dangerous weapon to P.W. 1, Malhu Shahani."
The medical evidence in the case is as per the version put forth by Dr. Jaldhar
Prasad Jha, P. W. 10. He stated that on 1.3.1983 at 4 a.m. he examined Malhu
Shahni and found one penetrating wound " x 1/10" (depth not probed) on the
upper part of the abdomen on midline. He also found one incised wound " x
2/10" into skin deep on the outer side of left eye of Malhu. He also found
swelling 4" x 3" on left thigh and a swelling 2" x 1" on left upper arm of Malhu.
He opined that the penetrating wound was caused by sharp pointed weapon and
incised wound was caused by sharp cutting weapon and the swelling was
caused by hard and blunt substance and the age of the injuries was within 12
hours.
It is now contended before us that the appellant had inflicted only one
blow in the spur of the moment to Malhu Shahani in the middle of the abdomen;
that the injury caused was only " x 1/10" (depth not probed) on the middle of
the abdomen and thus did not affect any vital organ of the injured person nor did
it impair the functioning of the injured person in any manner.
For conviction under Section 326 the requirements of Section 320 IPC
must be satisfied. Considering the fact that though only one blow was caused
by the appellant, from the weapon used namely ’Bhala’, it must be inferred that it
was likely to cause the death of the injured person and, therefore, the offence is
made out under Section 326 IPC and he was rightly convicted under that
provision.
However, in regard to sentence, we are inclined to take a lenient view in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
the matter. It is brought to our notice that there was compromise between the
parties and on the basis of compromise petition the trial court directed the other
accused who were found guilty of the charges under Sections 147 and 148 to be
released on executing a bond to keep peace and be of good behaviour for a
period of one year by invoking Section 360 Cr.P.C. The appellant has already
undergone about six months of imprisonment so far. The incident took place
about two decades back. In these circumstances, we impose the sentence of
imprisonment for the period already undergone and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-.
In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo imprisonment for a
further period of three months. On payment of fine, he shall be released
forthwith.
The appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated above.