LexMANUBHAI ATABHAI versus STATE OF GUJARAT
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
... -! -- ...... MANUBHAI AT ABHAI A v. ST A TE OF GUJARAT JUNE 21, 2007 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P.P. NAOLEKAR, JJ.] B Penal Code, 1860: ss.302 and 304 Part I-Deceased was attacked with a knife-Trial Court convicted accused under s.304 Part I-High Court convicted him C under s. 302-0n appeal, held: Injury was caused just below stomach and had affected vital part of the body-Knife had gone as deep as 6cm in the body showing that blow was given with great force-Single blow does not automatically bring in application of s.304 Part I-Order of High Court does not suffer from any infirmity. D Prosecution case was that there was a dispute regarding construction of wall between the properties of complainant and that of accused persons. Both sides had lodged complaints before the date of incident. On the date of incident, the appellant and his father and brothers who were other accused came to the house of complainant and started giving abuses. The complainant E came out of the house and inquired of reasons of his giving abuses. The appellant also came on the spot with an open knife, A-3 came there with an axe and A-4 had an iron pipe in his hand. Deceased, son the complainant also came out of house and tried to pacify them. Appellant gave a knife blow in the stomach of deceased. The complainant intervened and A-3 gave an axe blow on head of complainant and A-4 gave a pipe blow which was received by F complainant on his left hand. Thereafter, appellant and accused persons left the place of incident. Deceased was taken to hospital where he was declared dead. Trial Court convicted the appellant under s.304 Part I IPC while acquitting the other accused. High Court convicted appellant under s.302 IPC. G In appeal to this Court, appellant contended that two facts have been noted by the trial court to record conviction under s.304 Part 1 IPC they are: (1) - a single blow was given and no attempt was made to give second blow. (2) There was a cross case registered and that finding the prosecution version to be 1115 fl 1116 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 7 S.C.R. A inadequate, three accused persons were acquitted by the trial court which "'as upheld by the High Court. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The injury was 3cm x 2cm x 6cm about 6 cm. below sternum B and 8 cm above umbilicus. There was corresponding internal injury causing incised wound of2 cm on the interior border of the liver. Doctor had opined that the liver is a vital organ of the body and the injury found on the person of the deceased was sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. ~ -... (Para 7) (1118-F-G) C 2. The nature of intention has to be gathered from the kind of weapon used, the part of the body hit, the amount of force employed and the circumstances attendant upon death. The accused had used a knife, the blade of which had a length of 6 inches. The injury was caused just below the stomach and had affected a vital part i.e. liver. Knife had gone as deep as 6 D cm. in the body which clearly is indicative of the fact that blow was given with great force and the outcome of the injury was that the deceased expired instantaneously. Merely because a single blow was given that does not ...._. - automatically bring in application of s.304 Part I IPC. (Paras 8 and 9) [1118-G-H; 1119-A-B) E 3. The cross case has really no relevance for determining as to the F G nature of offence. The order of the High Court does not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference. [Para 10 and 11) [1119-C-D) CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 636-637 of2002. From the Judgment and Order dated 12.06.2001 of the High Court of ,r ._. Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 872 and 1034 of 1995. Shree Pal Singh and Rahul Singh for the Appellant. Abhishek Mishra and Hemantika Wahi for the. Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. l. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court, disposing of two criminal appeals. The appeal filed by the appellant (for the sake of convenience H described as 'A-2') was dismissed; the appeal filed by the State of Gujarat MANUBHAI ATABHAI v. STATE OF GUJARAT (PASA Y AT. J. ( 1117 -~ was allowed altering his conviction for offence punishable under Section304 A part I of the Indian Penal Code (in short the 'IPC') to Section 302 IPC while maintaining the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.