Attempt to murder requires proof of intent to cause death; simple injuries to non-vital parts cannot sustain the charge.

On 11 December 2024, a dispute arose at the complainant Mahendra’s farm concerning repair of a broken irrigation water line.

The prosecution alleged that Parth Yadav, Bharat Thakur and Jitendra Yadav arrived at the spot, abused and threatened the complainant party, and assaulted them. Jitendra allegedly caused an injury to Mahendra with an iron rod, while Parth allegedly struck Surendra with a brick and knife; Bharat allegedly assaulted them with kicks and punches.

An FIR was initially registered for offences under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Section 109 BNS was subsequently added after Mahendra was found to have suffered a grievous injury, namely an L2 vertebra fracture.

The investigating agency filed a closure report in respect of Jitendra on the basis of alibi, while the petitioner continued to face prosecution.

The V Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, framed charges under Sections 296, 351(3), 109 and 109 read with Section 3(5) BNS by order dated 21 May 2026. Parth Yadav challenged the framing of the Section 109 charge in revision under Sections 438 and 442 BNSS, contending that the grievous injury was attributed to Jitendra and that Surendra’s injuries were simple, with a normal X-ray report.

Whether the petitioner could be charged under Section 109 BNS for attempt to murder when the grievous injury relied upon by the prosecution was attributed to co-accused Jitendra, against whom a closure report had been filed?

Whether the medical evidence and surrounding circumstances disclosed the requisite intention or knowledge to commit murder so as to sustain a charge under Section 109 BNS against the petitioner?

The Court exercised revisional jurisdiction under Sections 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which is supervisory and not equivalent to appellate jurisdiction; interference is justified for jurisdictional error, patent illegality, material irregularity or perversity.

Section 109 BNS, concerning attempt to murder, requires both the requisite mens rea—intention or knowledge contemplated by the law of murder—and an overt act towards its commission.

Relying on Roshan Lal v. State of Haryana & Anr. , 2026 INSC 524, and the principles in State of M.P. v. Saleem @ Chamaru , (2005) 5 SCC 554, and Bipin Bihari v. State of M.P. , (2006) 8 SCC 799, the Court held that the seriousness of the injury is not by itself determinative, but the nature of the injury assists in assessing intention; intention may also be inferred from the weapon used, words spoken, motive, body part targeted, nature and extent of injuries, and manner of assault.

The Court found that the L2 vertebra fracture, which formed the principal basis for adding Section 109 BNS, was specifically attributed to Jitendra, who had been excluded from the charge-sheet through a closure report based on alibi. That injury therefore could not be used to infer an attempt to murder by Parth, whose alleged role was confined to assaulting Surendra.

Surendra’s medical examination recorded only wounds measuring 1×1 cm on the lower lip and 2×½ cm on the gluteal region, and his X-ray was normal.

Applying the factors identified in Roshan Lal , the Court held that the injuries were simple, were inflicted on non-vital parts of the body, and did not indicate the requisite intention to cause death. Although simple injuries can legally support an attempt-to-murder charge where the necessary intention is otherwise established, the surrounding circumstances in this case did not disclose such intention.

The trial court therefore committed a material irregularity and patent illegality in framing the Section 109 charge without the essential mental element.

It modified the order dated 21 May 2026 and discharged Parth Yadav from the offence under Section 109 BNS. The trial court was directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law on the remaining charges framed against him.