CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Supreme Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Sections 323 and 324 in Vellore Assault Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India has altered the conviction of two appellants, Sivamani and Dinesh Kumar, from Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to Sections 323 and 324 (causing simple hurt). The judgment was passed on 28th November 2023, in the case of Sivamani and Anr. Vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police, Vellore Taluk Police Station, Vellore District, with the bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah.

This criminal appeal, numbered 3619 of 2023, originated from a Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5136 of 2022. The appellants challenged the High Court’s affirmation of their conviction under Section 307 IPC and the reduction of their sentence from 10 years to 5 years Rigorous Imprisonment.

The case revolved around an assault incident stemming from a land dispute. The appellants, along with others, were accused of conspiring and attempting to murder the complainant (PW1) in his grocery shop, leading to the initial conviction under Section 307 IPC by the trial court.

In its detailed judgment, the Supreme Court highlighted that the injuries inflicted on the victims were simple and did not indicate an intent to kill, which is a requisite for conviction under Section 307 IPC. The Court, referring to precedents like State of Madhya Pradesh v Saleem and others, emphasized the importance of assessing the severity of injuries and the intent behind the act to ascertain the appropriateness of the charges.

Modifying the High Court’s judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that the conviction under Section 307 IPC was unsustainable and altered it to Sections 323 and 324 IPC. The sentence was reduced to the period already undergone by the appellants, and the imposed fine was maintained.

 Date of Decision: 28th November 2023

SIVAMANI AND ANR. VS STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

 

Latest Legal News