Kerala HC Upholds 5-Year Sentence For Man Who Attacked Neighbour With Chopper Over Belief Neighbour Killed His Dog

The prosecution alleged that on 3 January 2013, the appellant attacked PW2 with a chopper, causing a skull fracture and other serious injuries.

PW2, his wife (PW1), and a neighbour (PW3) testified to the assault; medical evidence corroborated the injuries.

The Sessions Court convicted the appellant under Sections 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), imposing concurrent prison terms of five and two years, respectively, with fines.

The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence, arguing, among other things, that independent witnesses had not been examined to prove the occurrence or recovery of the weapon

Section 307 IPC addresses an act done with the intention or knowledge, and in circumstances, that would make the act murder if it caused death; Section 326 IPC addresses voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means.

Under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, so much of information received from an accused in police custody as distinctly relates to a fact discovered may be proved.

The court relied on PW2’s direct evidence, which was supported by PW1 and the independent eyewitness PW3.

The medical testimony and records established serious head injuries, including a depressed skull fracture and intracranial injuries, and the doctors testified that the injuries could have been caused by the chopper.

The court rejected the challenge based on the absence of other occurrence witnesses because PW3 was an independent eyewitness and no material showed that other witnesses were available.

It also accepted the recovery evidence, relying on PW4 and the investigating officer, together with the recovery mahazar, as proof that the chopper and the appellant’s clothing were produced following information given by the appellant in custody.

On that evidence, the court found the offences established and saw no basis to reduce the sentence.

It cancelled the order suspending sentence and granting bail, directed the appellant to surrender before the Sessions Court to serve his sentence, and directed that court to execute the sentence if he failed to surrender.