STATE OF U.P versus JHINKOO NAI

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 266 · Decided: 03-08-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH · Disposal: Directions issued

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE Of U.P. 
v. 
JHINKOO NAI 
AUGUST 03, 2001 
B 
[M.B. SHAH AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 : 
Ss. 302134. 307134 and 324-Murder-Common intention to commit the 
C offence-Inference of-Murder by inflicting knife blows-Accused persons 
trying to rape the victim and on her resistance one of the accused murdering 
her and the other two injuring her father and mother-Pending trial, one of 
the accused died-Trial Court convicting two of the accused for offences 
under SectiOns 302134 and 307134 and acquilling the third accused-Pending 
D appeal before High Court, the other co-accused also died-High Court altering 
the sentence of respondent-accused to one under Section 324 by holding that 
the act of knife blows by accused was his individual acts-Held, not justified-
Conviction and sentence as ordered by trial court, restored 
Section 302134-Common intention-Held, can be proved on the basis 
E of direct evidence or by inference from acts or attending circumstances and 
conduct of the parties-No distinction can be made between persons inflicting 
fatal and nonfatal injuries for allocating the guilt. 
Accused persons armed with weapons entered the house of complainant 
in the night to take revenge for a quarrel that had taken place during the 
F day. They forcefully lifted the daughter of complainant to satisfy their lust. 
When she resisted, one of the accused stabbed her in the chest resulting in 
her death. On raising alarm, accused persons gave knife blows to other 
inmates of the house. During the pendency of trial, one of the accused died. 
Trial Court convicted two of the accused persons for offences under Sections 
G 302/34 and 307/34 IPC and acquitted the third accused. Convicted persons 
filed appeal before the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal one of 
the co-accused expired and his appeal stood abated. High Court held that the 
assault by knife on complainant and her husband were individual acts of 
accused and altered the conviction of respondent accused from Sections 302/ 
34 and 307/34 IPC to one under Section 324 IPC. Hence this appeal by State 
II 
266 
STATE OF U.P. v. JHINKOONAI 
267 
and the respondent accused filed SLP against his conviction. 
Allowing the State's appeal and dismissing the SLP filed by the 
respondent-accused, the Court. 
A 
HELD : l. The High Court erred in altering the conviction of the 
accused from Sections 302/34 and 307/34 IPC to one under Section 324 IPC B 
on the ground that assault by knife on complainant and her husband were 
individual acts of the accused. The order of the High Court is quashed and 
set aside. The order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court is 
restored~ (271-D, E, Fl 
2.1. The common intention or the intention of the individual concerned C 
in furtherance of the common intention could be proved either from direct 
evidence or by inference from the acts or attending circumstances of the case 
and conduct of the parties. For common intention, there could rarely be direct 
evidence. The ultimate decision, at any rate, would invariably depend upon 
the inferences deducible from the circumstances of the case. When several D 
persons simultaneously attack with common intention, no distinction between 
causing the fatal and non-fatal wounds could be drawn while allocating the 
guilt. 1270-e-DI 
H.P. Thakore v. State of Gujarat, (197614 sec 640, relied on. 
Mithu Singh v. State of Punjab, 120011 4 sec 193, distinguished. 
E 
2.2. In the instant case, accused were armed with knives; they entered 
the house of the complainant in the night; on refusal to submit to their sexual 
lust, accused despite resistance by the girl lifted her and brought her to the 
verandah. At that stage when deceased was crying and resisting, her father F 
and her mother got up and started raising shouts. One of the accused gave 
knife blow to the deceased and two others gave knife blows to her father and 
mother. From these facts, the only reasonable inference which could be drawn 
is that common intention of the accused was to ravish the young poor harijan 
girl and in case of resistance, to commit murder by inflicting knife blows. Their 
adventure in criminality cannot be watered down or nullified by contending G 
that injuries caused by them have not resulted in death of the complainant 
and her husband, viz. the parents of the girls. (271-A, B, C( 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 
1077 of 1999. 
H 
268 
SUPREME COURT REPORT

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.