Deadly Weapons Not Necessary To Commit Murder: Rajasthan HC Rejects Bail Of Accused Who Fatally Injured Deceased Using 'Safety Shoes'

Rajasthan High Court has ruled that it is not always necessary for the accused to use a deadly weapon or to attack upon the vital body parts like the head, to commit murder, While dismissing the bail application for a murder accused, it was observed that even safety shoes, when used as a weapon, can significantly increase the potential for inflicting serious or fatal injuries.

The bench of Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni was hearing the bail application wherein the facts were that the deceased was attending a wedding with his daughter. While dancing, the accused puts his hand on the daughter's shoulders which enraged the deceased who attempted to take away his daughter from the event.

At this moment, the accused, who was wearing safety shoes, came running towards the deceased and inflicted blows and kicks on the deceased's stomach and private parts. The deceased was taken to the hospital where he died. An FIR was filed against the accused charging him with murder of the deceased.

It was the case of the accused that the postmortem report of the deceased revealed that the death was not caused by the blows and kicks but due to surgical wounds i.e. septicemic shock resulting from peritoneum perforation. It was also argued that due to the deceased's enragement towards his daughter, the actions of the accused were due to sudden provocation and not with an intention to cause death of the deceased.

The arguments of the counsel for the petitioner were rejected by the Court which firstly observed that the situation could not be considered as sudden provocation for the accused but rather the deceased who wanted to take her daughter away when the accused touched her publicly.

Secondly, the Court observed that the manner in which the accused delivered blows and kicks to the deceased while wearing safety shoes, demonstrated his intention to cause the latter's death. It was opined that safety shoes were typically designed with hard and protective materials like metal toes or reinforced soles, hence, safety shoes were used as a weapon by the accused.

“It is not reasonable to believe that a person's death cannot result from kicks and punches, particularly in a situation where the accused, wearing safety shoes, kicks a person in the stomach and private parts…The kick could rupture blood vessels, leading to internal bleeding, which may be fatal if not treated immediately. The hard and reinforced nature of safety shoes has act as a de facto weapon, increasing the lethality of the assault. Therefore, this act of petitioner prima facie meets the ingredients of murder.”

In the background of this analysis, the Court held that the accused had prima facie intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to the deceased by kicking him with safety shoes which met the mens rea requirement for murder. Hence, the Court found the accused not suitable to be granted bail.

Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed.

Title: Vikas v State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 268

Click Here To Read/Download Order