Chhattisgarh HC Upholds Attempt-To-Murder Conviction After Knife Stab Damaged Victim’s Intestine, Cuts Sentence To 3 Years

On 14 July 2025, following a dispute concerning alleged liquor kept at the appellant’s house, the appellant later allegedly attacked Bhagirathi Kurre with a knife near a motorcycle repair shop, causing an abdominal injury that damaged the victim’s intestine and required surgery.

The Special Court convicted the appellant under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Section 25(1-B)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959, and Section 3(1)(ध) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).

In this appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act, the appellant challenged the convictions and sentences.

Section 109(1) of the BNS applies where a person performs an act with the intention or knowledge, and in circumstances, such that causing death by that act would amount to murder; an attempt requires the requisite mens rea coupled with an overt act, and the injury need not itself be sufficient to cause death.

The court relied on State of Madhya Pradesh v. Saleem @ Chamaru, (2005) 5 SCC 554, and Bipin Bihari v. State of M.P., (2006) 8 SCC 799, for the principle that intention may be inferred from the circumstances, including the weapon, the part of the body targeted, the manner of the assault and the nature of the injuries.

The court also considered whether the caste-abuse allegation was reliably established by the evidence, including its omission from the FIR and the first police statement.

The court found the assault proved through the victim and eyewitness testimony, supported by medical evidence and recovery of the knife.

Although only one stab wound was medically established, it penetrated the abdomen, damaged the intestine and, according to the treating doctor, could have caused death without timely treatment.

The appellant had earlier threatened the victim and later travelled to the place where the victim was present and stabbed him in a vital part of the body; taken together, these circumstances established the mens rea required by Section 109(1).

The knife recovery and evidence of the assault supported the Arms Act conviction.

By contrast, the caste-related allegation was omitted from the FIR and the first police statement and appeared in a later statement, leading the court to regard it as an exaggeration or afterthought and not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

The conviction under Section 3(1)(ध) of the SC/ST Act was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of that charge.

The convictions under Section 109(1) of the BNS and Section 25(1-B)(b) of the Arms Act were affirmed.

The sentence under Section 109(1) was reduced from five years’ rigorous imprisonment to three years; the fine and default sentence, the Arms Act sentence, and the direction that the sentences run concurrently remained unchanged.