To Attract Applicability Of Section 324 IPC, Voluntary Hurt Must Be Caused By 'Dangerous' Instrument Which Can Cause Death: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that to attract Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), voluntary hurt must be caused by instruments of shooting, stabbing, or cutting. The court noted that the use of such instruments can definitely cause death.
Justices Ananda Sen and Subhash Chand observed, “Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code provides for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. ... To attract Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, a voluntary hurt should be caused by an instrument of shooting and stabbing or cutting. Definitely use of the said instrument can cause death.”
In the case in question, the informant alleged that when returning home near Railway Crossing, he was intercepted by Chotu Kalindi, Bhalu Kalindi, Musru Kalindi, and Babulal Kalindi, who demanded money for liquor. When the informant refused, they assaulted him with weapons like swords and sticks. The informant's son, who came to his aid, was also assaulted, resulting in a head injury.
An FIR was registered, and a charge sheet was filed under Sections 323/34, 341/34, 324/34, and 307/34 of the IPC. The trial court convicted the appellant, who then appealed the conviction.
The appellant contended that no independent witnesses were examined and emphasised the quality over the number of witnesses. The court noted, “Admittedly, in this case sword was used by Bhalu Kalindi. Further, we find that this case does not fall within the exception, i.e., Section 334 of the Indian Penal Code as there was no grave and sudden provocation from the side of the informant.”
The court further stated, “If the accused tries to extort money from any person and he refused to part away with the same, then if the accused assaults the person from whom, they were trying to extort, it cannot be said that assault was out of grave and sudden provocation. Thus, we find that Bhalu Kalindi cannot be held guilty under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, rather he can be held guilty of offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.”
The court concluded that the prosecution had proved the charge against appellant Bhalu Kalindi under Section 324 and 341 of the IPC, and against appellants Chhotu Kalindi, Musru Kalindi, and Babu Lall Kalindi under Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC. The appeal was partly allowed based on these considerations.
Case Title: Chhotu Kalindi V. The State of Jharkhand
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 120