Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302 and 326 – Murder – Conviction by trial court u/s.302 accepting the prosecution case that the accused persons armed with deadly weapons went to the agricultural field were the victim (complainant’s father) was working and beat him, resulting in his death – High Court converted the conviction to that u/s.326, primarily on grounds that the victim died six days after the incident and no fracture was found on his head – Justification – Held: Not justified – Merely because the victim died six days after the incident not a ground to set aside the conviction u/s.302 and convert it u/s.326 – Also, merely because no fracture was noticed and/or found cannot take the case out of s.302 when the victim died due to head injury – Causing injury on the head can be said to be causing injury on the vital part of the body and therefore a clear case of s.302 is established and proved – Conviction by trial court, of first respondent u/s.302 and of second respondent u/s.302 r/w s.34, accordingly, restored.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1.1. Merely because the deceased died after six days could not have been the ground to set aside the conviction for the offence under Section 302 IPC and to convert it to Section
326 IPC. The deceased was first taken to the PHC, however his condition was found to be serious and therefore, he was taken to the Lucknow Hospital on 20.12.1983 and thereafter while under treatment he died on 26.12.1983 and the main cause of death is found to be the head injury no.1. Though the High Court has noticed the nine injuries as noticed by the Medical Officer at PHC, the High Court has not at all noticed and/or considered at all the antemortem injuries on the dead body mentioned in the post-mortem report. As per the medical evidence the cause of death was due to head injury no.1. The weapon was used on the head - vital part of the body and ultimately the same proved to be fatal and the deceased died due to head injury no.1. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination the case would fall under Section
326 IPC. [Para 7.1][220-G-H; 221-A-B]
1.2. One another reason given by the High Court to convert the conviction from Section 302 IPC to Section 326 IPC is that no fracture on the head was found. However, it is required to be noted that the deceased died because of the internal injuries. As per the deposition of PW8, who conducted the post-mortem, on opening of the brain menages, he found brain congested, subdural hematoma over both temporal lobes. Therefore, merely because no fracture was noticed and/or found cannot take the case out of Section 302 IPC when the deceased died due to head injury no.1. Causing injury on the head can be said to be causing injury on the vital part of the body and therefore a clear case of Section
302 IPC has been established and proved. Therefore, the trial Court rightly convicted the accused for the offences under Section
302 IPC and Section 302/34 IPC respectively. [Para 7.2] [221-C-E]
1.3. Even otherwise considering Section 326 IPC, one fails to appreciate how the case would fall under Section 326 IPC when the deceased actually died due to grievous hurt and the injuries were on the vital part of the body – head. [Para 7.3][221-E-F]
2. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused- respondents for the offence under Section 302 IPC and Section 302/34 IPC respectively and convicting them for the offence under Section 326 IPC is hereby quashed and set aside. The judgment and order of the trial Court convicting the first respondent for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and convicting the second respondent for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC is hereby restored. The respondents- accused are sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with the fine as imposed by the trial Court. [Para 8][222-B-C]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.