Analysis of Conviction in Assault Case

a complaint came to be lodged before Koheer Police Station alleging that on 08.04.2012 at 09:00 p.m., A-1 to A- 6 came to their house and assaulted Smt.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-upholds-landlords-right-to-terminate-tenancy-for-personal-cultivation/

After trial, Learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 15.11.2012 convicted A-1 to A-4 and A-6 for the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and acquitted them for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.

Aggrieved by the said judgment, appellants herein filed appeal in Criminal Appeal No.1168 of 2012.

She would also submit that Sessions Judge has not recorded any finding as to how the ingredients of Section 34 of IPC had been satisfied and based on vague statements and even in absence of corroborative material appellants have been convicted which cannot be sustained.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/consolidation-of-firs-in-multi-state-fraud-case/

But his evidence that he could not clearly make out the specific overacts of the accused, as the family members of PW-2 and the accused formed into a crowd, can be taken into consideration, not for concluding that the other accused did not beat the deceased, but xxx circumstances.

If it were to be so, nothing prevented the relatives of deceased, namely, PW-2 to PW-5 who had accompanied the deceased to the hospital to get themselves treated for any purported or alleged injuries sustained by them, if at all, they had received any medical treatment for said injuries.

The prosecution has thus failed to drive home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and we say so for the simple reason that courts below itself had found that evidence tendered by the prosecution did not clearly establish two facts namely: (1) The appellants herein having assaulted the deceased; (2) The alleged injuries sustained by PW-2 to 5 had remained as a bald statement without proof.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-upholds-conviction-of-accused-for-dowry-death-and-cruelty-under-ipc-and-dp-act/

Surety Bonds, if any, having been executed, stand discharged.

Case Title: BOINI MAHIPAL Vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA (2023 INSC 629)

Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001750-001750 / 2023

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *