Pushed Out Of Running Train Upon Sudden Quarrel, Not Attempt To Murder: Bombay High Court

"There was no premeditation and no preparation for commission of offence. The incident had taken place suddenly as a result of sudden quarrel. In that quarrel the Appellant got angry and pushed PW-1 from a running train. Therefore, his intention or knowledge cannot be stretched to conclude that he attempted to commit murder of PW-1. Though, it is proved that the injured PW 1 had suffered grievous injury, which was even dangerous to his life, the requisite intention and knowledge mentioned U/s.307 of I.P.C. is not proved. From the nature of evidence, in my view, though the ingredients of Section 307 of I.P.C. are not proved, the ingredients of Section 308 of I.P.C. are proved by the prosecution", the court held.

The court was dealing with a criminal appeal against appellant's was conviction under section 307 (attempt to murder) of the IPC. Appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 7 years and fine of Rs 3,000 by the trial court.

Till May 15, 2022 he had suffered actual imprisonment of 5 years 4 months and 8 days and was released on COVID parole.

The court considered the mitigating factors such as young age and recent marriage of the appellant and reduced the sentence to the period he had already suffered. "At the time of arrest, the Appellant was hardly of 22 years old. He was recently married and was blessed with a child only a few days before the incident. These are the mitigating circumstances in deciding the quantum of sentence", the court stated.

The prosecution's case was that the injured Nandakumar Joshi was travelling in a bogie for handicapped persons in a local train to Kasara. There was a quarrel with the appellant who was standing at the door. The quarrel led to a scuffle between the appellant, Joshi and other passengers and he pushed Joshi from the running train.

The court perused the witness testimonies before the trial court and concluded that the witness statements are consistent regarding the major aspects. There are minor discrepancies but the incident as a whole is consistently deposed by them, the court said.

The court said that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that there was a quarrel between the injured and the appellant. There was a scuffle between the appellant and the other passengers and the appellant deliberately pushed the injured down from a running train.

The court noted that according to the medical evidence, the injuries suffered by Joshi were grievous and dangerous to his life. These injuries are possible from a running train and since the appellant pushed him, he has caused these injurious.

Therefore, the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that in the quarrel and scuffle, the appellant deliberately pushed the injured from the running train causing grievous injury, the court held.

However, the court said that the prosecution's evidence is lacking with respect to section 307 of the IPC. The appellant did not know the injured and there was no premeditation for the offence.

However, the court said that the prosecution has proved ingredients of section 308 of the IPC. While there was no premeditation, "the Appellant had pushed the injured from a running train, therefore, he can be attributed knowledge that his act was endangering to life of the PW-1. Therefore, his act would fall within the meaning of Section 308 of I.P.C.", the court held.

Considering the injuries caused to the injured, the court said that maximum punishment is not required in this case and reduced the sentence to the period he has already undergone imprisonment.

Case no. – Criminal Appeal No. 128 of 2018

Case title – Mohammad Azad Alam Diljad Ansari v. State of Maharashtra

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 476