Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization

“Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Attempt to Murder Case: ‘What is Important is an Intention Coupled with the Overt Act’”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal of S K Khaja, who was convicted under Sections 307 and 332 of the IPC. The apex court emphasized, “What is important is an intention coupled with the overt act committed by the appellant/accused.”

The appellant, S K Khaja, had challenged the High Court’s decision that confirmed his conviction and sentencing to rigorous imprisonment for five years and two years for the respective offenses. The case revolved around the appellant’s alleged acts of demanding ransom and threatening the public, leading to an altercation with police during his arrest.

The appellant’s counsel argued that the injuries inflicted on the police officer were not severe enough to warrant a conviction under Section 307 of the IPC. However, the State countered by pointing out that the appellant had misused his liberty and was involved in four other cases during the appeal.

In its observation, the Court noted, “The trial court, as well as, the High Court have rightly appreciated the evidence and convicted the appellant/accused – S K Khaja for the offense punishable under Sections 307 and 332 of the IPC.”

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the conviction and sentences imposed by the lower courts. The appellant has been directed to surrender before the trial Court within a period of four weeks.

This landmark judgment serves as a reminder that the severity of the injury is not the sole criterion for conviction; the intention and the overt act are equally significant.

DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 23, 2023

S K KHAJA vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA       

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/23-Aug-2023_SK_Khaja_Vs_State.pdf"]

Latest Legal News