Patna HC Refuses To Discharge Men Accused In Attack On Mukhiya Candidate’s Husband During Election Campaign

The informant alleged that, while campaigning for his wife in a Mukhiya election, he was attacked by the petitioners and others.

The complaint attributed an iron-rod blow to the head to petitioner Surendra Singh, and alleged that the other accused assaulted the informant; the incident was said to have arisen from an attempt to make the informant’s wife withdraw her candidature.

The petitioners challenged the order dated 17 July 2018 in Sessions Trial No. 87/2014, arguing that no grievous injury was found and that the specific iron-rod allegation was against Surendra Singh alone, while the allegations against the others were general.

The High Court considered the challenge to the order refusing discharge.

The Court applied the principle that grave suspicion is sufficient to frame charges against an accused.

Sections 307 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code were addressed in the petitioners’ submissions and the Court’s account of the allegations, respectively; the judgment did not set out a separate statutory test for either provision.

The Court noted that the petitioners did not dispute the occurrence, but argued that the case against them was groundless because the injury was not grievous and the specific assault allegation concerned Surendra Singh.

It nevertheless found that the accused were named in the FIR and that the informant’s account supported their active involvement in the occurrence, in which the informant sustained a head injury.

The charge-sheet and subsequent cognizance also formed part of the record.

Applying the grave-suspicion threshold, the Court found no basis to interfere with the challenged order.

It directed that a copy of the judgment be sent to the trial court forthwith.