Criminal Law
Mode of Citation- ILC-2017-SC-CRL-....
Get started with Indian Law Cases
Your password will be generated automatically and will be sent to your email-id provided in this form.
Full Name  
Email ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City
Mobile No
* Mobile No is required for verification of identity
 Bare Acts  | Legal Resources  | Lawyer Locater  | Articles  | Legal Dictionary  | Download Desktop Software  | Subscription   Home   |   E-Journal  |  Sign-In  | Contact Us  | Disclaimers

Criminal Law
 Search Tips
Criminal Law
Mode of Citation- ILC-2017-SC-CRL-....
Judgement Subject Index/Important Decision/Topic

ILC-2014-SC-CRL-Feb-10

Pasupuleti Siva Ramakrishna Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

Head Note

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 307 , Section 324 , Section 452 , Section 34

Trespass - Attempt to murder - Acquittal - Sustainability - Appellant/complainant was attacked by respondent/accused and injured him - Charge sheet against respondent was filed u/ss. 307, 452 r/w s. 34 IPC - Trial Court convicted respondent u/ss. 452, 307 r/w s. 34 IPC - On appeal filed by respondents HC partly allowed the appeal and acquitted respondent for the offences u/s. 452 r/w s. 34 IPC, HC further modified conviction and sentence u/s. 307 r/w s. 34 IPC to one u/s. 324 IPC - Hence instant appeal - There was no merit in the contention that the statement of Medical Officer that there was no danger to life unless there was dislocation or rupture of the thyroid bone due to strangulation means that respondents did not intend, or have the knowledge, that their act would cause death - Circumstances of instant case attract the second part of s. 307 IPC since the act resulted in injury No.5 which was a ligature mark - SC was of the view that it was a clear case of intention to commit the murder of PW1, appellant and accused acted in concert and committed an offence u/s. 307 IPC - HC had simply set aside the conviction of respondents u/s. 452 IPC r/w s. 34 IPC only on the ground that the victim was sitting at the Lorry Workers Union Office and not at any private place - There was no doubt that the trespass was into a house and that appellant entered the office having prepared to assault the victim and in any case for putting him in fear of hurt or of assault - There was nothing in s. 452 IPC to suggest that the use to which the house was put makes any difference - It was not the requirement of s. 452 IPC that for a trespass to be an offence the house should be a private place and not an office - Thus respondents were not entitled to be acquitted for the offences u/s. 452 IPC r/w s. 34 IPC - Impugned judgment of HC was set aside and restore the Judgment of Trial Court - Appeal allowed.

Topic(s)-Attempt to Murder – House Trespass







Full Judgement Body


     
@2016 Indian Law
Name  
Email ID
Please Wait..