INTRODUCTION
Today, I will talk about the case of Surinder
Singh v. State (Union Territory of Chandigarh), Criminal Appeal No.
2373 of 2010, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed Section 307 of the
Indian Penal Code (IPC) that deals with the offence of attempt to murder.
S. 307 – BARE PROVISION
Section 307 of IPC states that: -
“Whoever does any act with such intention or
knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death,
he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable
to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be
liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is
hereinbefore mentioned.”
Thus, Section 307 has following ingredients: -
a. Intention or knowledge to cause death.
b. Commission of an act in furtherance to such
intention. And
c. If hurt is caused in this process, then more
severe punishment is prescribed.
In order to understand S. 307 in a better manner,
let us go through the pertinent observations by the Court.
OBSERVATIONS BY THE COURT
Firstly, the Court noted that “it is
sufficient to justify a conviction under Section 307 if there is present an
intent coupled with some overt act in execution thereof. It is not essential
that bodily injury capable of causing death should have been inflicted. The
section makes a distinction between the act of the accused and its result, if
any. The court has to see whether the act, irrespective of its result, was done
with the intention or knowledge and under circumstances mentioned in the
section. Therefore, an accused charged under Section 307 IPC cannot be
acquitted merely because the injuries inflicted on the victim were in the
nature of a simple hurt.”
Secondly, the Court cited the case of State
of Madhya Pradesh v. Saleem & Another, (2005) 5 SCC 554, wherein it
was observed that to justify a conviction under Section 307, “it is not
essential that bodily injury capable of causing death should have been
inflicted. Although the nature of injury actually caused may often give
considerable assistance in coming to a finding as to the intention of the
accused, such intention may also be deduced from other circumstances, and may
even, in some cases, be ascertained without any reference at all to actual
wounds.”
Thirdly, the Court opined that in relation to S.
307, there are two ingredients that a Court must consider: -
a. Whether there was any intention or knowledge on
the part of accused to cause death of the victim?
b. Such intent or knowledge was followed by some
overt act, irrespective of the consequential result as to whether or not any
injury is inflicted upon the victim.
According to the Court, such intent may be deduced
“from the conduct of the accused and surrounding circumstances of the
offence, including the nature of weapon used or the nature of injury, if any.”
And lastly, the Court also clarified that there is
no requirement of ‘motive’ to prove a charge under Section 307 of IPC. In
words of the Court, “whilst motive is infallibly a crucial factor, and is
a substantial aid for evincing the commission of an offence but the absence
thereof is, however, not such a quintessential component which can be construed
as fatal to the case of the prosecution, especially when all other factors
point towards the guilt of the accused.” Thus, “the absence of
motive alone cannot abjure the guilt of” an accused.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Those were the observations by the Court. In
conclusion, following pertinent points emerge: -
a. To attract S. 307, intention or knowledge to
cause death along with some consequential overt act must be present.
b. Intention could be gathered from the nature of
injuries and in absence of injuries, from other circumstances.
c. It is not essential that bodily injury capable
of causing death should have been inflicted.
d. The absence of motive would not be sufficient
to abjure the guilt of an accused.
Thus, I hope that the nature and the scope of
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is clear by now.
No comments:
Post a Comment