First-Time Offender Who Fractured Lorry Driver’s Leg With Blunt Spatula Gets One-Year Probation As Madras HC Alters IPC Section 326 Conviction To 325

On 29 December 2016, following a quarrel, the appellant struck Periyasamy (PW1) with an iron spatula, causing two fractures in his right leg.

The Sessions Court acquitted the other accused and convicted the appellant under Section 326 IPC, sentencing him to one year’s simple imprisonment and a fine of ₹25,000, payable as compensation to the victim.

On appeal, the appellant’s counsel did not challenge the evidence of guilt but sought a reduction in sentence; the Court nevertheless considered whether the spatula qualified as a dangerous weapon under Section 326 IPC.

The appellant also sought release on probation, supported by a Probation Officer’s report recommending it.

Section 326 IPC requires grievous hurt to be caused by a dangerous weapon or means; whether an object is dangerous depends on its nature, characteristics and manner of use, not merely its material or the injury caused (Mathai v. State of Kerala, (2005) 3 SCC 260).

Fractures constitute grievous hurt under Section 320 IPC and, where the requirements of Section 326 are not established, may support conviction under Section 325 IPC.

The testimony of an injured eyewitness carries substantial evidentiary weight and should not be rejected without cogent reason (State of M.P. v. Mansingh, (2003) 10 SCC 414; Lakshman Singh v. State of Bihar (now Jharkhand), AIR 2021 SC 3552).

Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act permits release on probation for an offence not punishable with death or life imprisonment, and Section 11(1) empowers an appellate court to exercise that power; the Court also treated consideration of a Probation Officer’s report as mandatory, relying on Chellammal v. State, 2025 INSC 540.

PW1’s clear evidence identifying the appellant was corroborated by PW7 and by the medical evidence establishing two fractures; the Court found no basis to discredit that evidence.

However, the spatula was flat and blunt, with no sharp edge or point, and the Court held that the fractures alone did not establish that it was a dangerous weapon under Section 326 IPC. It therefore substituted Section 325 IPC for Section 326 IPC.

As the altered offence was not punishable with death or life imprisonment, probation was legally available. Given the appellant’s lack of prior convictions, the favourable Probation Officer’s report, and the absence of evidence that he posed a continuing danger or had misused bail, the Court considered probation appropriate.

The imprisonment sentence was kept suspended, and the appellant was directed to execute a bond with one surety before the Trial Court within one week, to appear and receive sentence if called upon during the one-year period and to keep the peace and maintain good behaviour.