No Cogent And Positive Evidence To Establish That Accused Assaulted Deceased: SC Sets Aside Conviction Under Section 323 IPC
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal challenging the impugned order of the High Court, wherein the Appellant was convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court acquitted the Appellant because the Prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Bench of Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar held, "...there was no cogent and positive evidence available to prove or establish the fact that appellants herein (A-3 and A-4) having assaulted the deceased."
Advocate Prity Kumari appeared for the Appellant/Accused and Adovcate Sriharsha Peechara appeared for the Respondents.
A complaint was filed against the Appellant for allegedly entering the house of the deceased and kicking her in her stomach, which caused her to fall on the floor. Even after two rounds of treatment, the deceased could not recover and passed away. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant and other co-accused under Section 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing harm) with Section 34 IPC but acquitted the Appellant under Section 302 (punishment for murder). The Appellant then filed before the High Court which the court dismissed.
The Apex Court rejected the prosecution's contentions that the Appellant assaulted the deceased and held that such contentions could not be accepted due to the lack of cogent evidence. The Prosecution also claimed that the relatives of the deceased were assaulted but no evidence could be produced before the court to prove the same. Thus, the contentions of the Prosecution were not maintainable.
“From the above finding it would clearly emerge that there was no cogent and positive evidence available to prove or establish the fact that appellants herein (A-3 and A-4) having assaulted the deceased. On the other hand the prosecution has attempted to project the case that relatives of the deceased were beaten or assaulted by the appellants herein. If it were to be so, nothing prevented the relatives of deceased, namely, PW-2 to PW-5 who had accompanied the deceased to the hospital to get themselves treated for any purported or alleged injuries sustained by them, if at all, they had received any medical treatment for said injuries. However, no evidence is forthcoming in this regard. In the absence of the same, on hypothesis conviction of the appellants cannot be sustained”, the Bench observed.
The Cout after due consideration of the facts and evidence presented, acquitted the Appellant from his conviction under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC. In this context, the Court noted, “The prosecution has thus failed to drive home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and we say so for the simple reason that courts below itself had found that evidence 10 tendered by the prosecution did not clearly establish two facts namely: (1) The appellants herein having assaulted the deceased; (2) The alleged injuries sustained by PW-2 to 5 had remained as a bald statement without proof”.
Accordingly, the Court acquitted the Appellant and set aside the impugned order of the High Court.
Cause Title: Boini Mahipal and Anr v State of Telangana (2023 INSC 627)
Click here to read/download Judgement
