Karnataka High Court
Sri Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 7 January, 2026
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:800
CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023
CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9889 OF 2024
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8634 OF 2023
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4198 OF 2024
IN CRL.P.No.9889/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRI UMESH
S/O.SRI VASANTHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT KAGGRE VILLAGE
BELLAVI HOBLI
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 130
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
COURT OF REP. BY BELLAVI POLICE STATION
KARNATAKA BELLAVI-572 130
TUMAKURU TALUK & DISTRICT
REP.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. SRI GURU P.
S/O.PARASHIVAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT KAGGERE VILLGE
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:800
CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023
CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024
HC-KAR
BELLAVI HOBLI
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMKAKURU DISTRICT-572 130
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.PC. (UNDER SECTION 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.113/2022 (CRIME NO.
60/2021) REGISTERED BY BELLAVI POLICE STATION FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 506, 427
AND 324 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU INITIATED ON THE
COMPLAINT OF RESPONDENT NO.2.
IN CRL.P.NO.8634/2023:
BETWEEN:
SRI NIRANJAN
S/O.MR.SHIVALINGIAH
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT KAGGERE
BELLAVI HOBALI
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMAKURU-572 130
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI KEERTHI PRASAD D.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH CHELUR P.S.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001
2. SMT.RASHMI
W/O.MR.UMESHA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
RESIDING AT KAGGERE
BELLAVI HOBALI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:800
CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023
CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024
HC-KAR
TUMKURU TALUK
TUMKURU-572 130
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1;
R-2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.PC. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.5272/2022, FIR NO.2/2022 DATED 02.01.2022
REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1-CHELUR POLICE PENDING
ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT GUBBI
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 174, 175,
201, 326, 447, 504 AND 506 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.NO.4198/2024:
BETWEEN:
SRI GURU
S/O.LATE PARASHIVAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT KAGGERE VILLAGE
BELLAVI HOBALI
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMAKURU-572 130
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT.RADHIKA K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH CHELUR P.S.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
2. SMT.RASHMI
W/O.MR.UMESH
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT KAGGERE
BELLAVI HOBLI
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:800
CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024
C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023
CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024
HC-KAR
TUMAKURU TALUK
TUMAKURU-572 130
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.PC. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
CC.NO.5272/2022 FILED IN FIR NO.2/2022 DATED 02.01.2022
REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1-CHELUR POLICE PENDING
ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT
GUBBI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
174, 175, 201, 326, 447, 504 AND 506 OF IPC.
THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
These petitions are preferred by different accused in different crime numbers arising out of a dispute over the same property. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.8634/2023 and Crl.P.No.4198/2024 are before this court calling in question the proceedings in CC.No.5272/2022 arising of out of the FIR in Crime No. 02/2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 174, 175, 201, 326, 447, 504 and 506 of the IPC. The petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 is before this court calling in question the proceedings in CC.No.113/2022 arising of out of -5- NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR the FIR in Crime No. 60/2021 registered for offences punishable under Sections 427, 326 and 506 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri. Keerthi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2023, Smt. Radhika K., learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4198/2024, Sri. Vinay Mahadevaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State in all the three petitions and Sri. V.B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.4198/2024.
3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-
The petitioners and respondent No.2 in all the petitions before this Court are at loggerheads over the same property. They are also before the concerned Civil Court in O.S.Nos.347/2021 and O.S. Nos.17/2022. The issue does not relate to the civil proceedings. Different complaints are filed by the complainants/Respondent No.2 in the subject petitions alleging that the accused have assaulted and instigated such assault, on different dates. The complaints come to be registered for the varied offences including the ones punishable under Sections -6- NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR 324 and 326 of the IPC. The Police conduct investigation and file the charge sheets for the aforesaid complaints. Filing of the charge sheets against the petitioners herein, have driven the petitioners to this Court in the subject petitions.
4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2024, would vehemently contend that it is a case of a case and counter case. The petitioner has also been assaulted, but the allegation is that the petitioner has assaulted the complainants. He would seek to draw a difference between the crime registered by the complainant against the petitioner from the crime which is registered by the petitioner against the complainant. He would submit that it is not a case of blow vs. blow as it has happened on different times.
5. Learned counsel representing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4198/2024 would, in particular, submit that there is no allegation against the petitioner that would touch upon the ingredients of any of the offences so alleged. In that light, she would seek quashment of the proceedings. -7-
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR
6. Learned counsel representing the petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 states that the offences alleged against the petitioner are not made out in the said case and there is no direct or circumstantial evidence against the petitioner. Further, there is no material in the case to sustain charges under Section 324 of the IPC. In that light, he would seek quashment of the proceedings.
7. Per contra, Learned HCGP appearing for the state in all these petitions would take this Court through the wound certificate and the summary of the charge sheet in all the cases to contend that the dispute subsists and the assault has happened because of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2023 and would contend that the offences are the ones punishable under Sections 326 or 324 of IPC as the case would be, which are grave in nature and this Court should not exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.PC. to entertain the subject petitions.
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsels and have perused the material on record.
9. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The dispute between the parties is subsisting before a Civil Court in the aforesaid original suits with regard to the same property. These matters are not in dispute. The crimes come to be registered on different dates for different offences. The single stream that flows through the subject petitions is, assault by the petitioner against the complainant or the complainant against the petitioner.
10. The summary of the charge sheet filed in Crime No.02/2022 which is challenged in Crl.P.No.8634/2023 and Crl.P.No.4198/2024, is as follows:
" ೇಳ ರು ೕ ಾ ಾ ಸರಹದು, ಕ ೆ ೆ ಾ ಮದ ಾ 02 ರವರ ಾ§ÄÛ ಎಂ.ಎಂ.ಎ ಾವ ಸ ೆ! ನಂ. 177 ರ°è 2.6 JPÀgÉ vÉAV£À #ೋಟದ & ಅನುಭವದ &ದು, ಈ *ಾಗದ , ಾರದ ,& -ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ 12 ರ & ಕಂಡ ಆ ೋ4 1 ರವ5 ತPÀgÁgÀÄ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. 6.25/12/2021 ರಂದು ೆ7 ೆ 8-30 ಗಂ8ೆ ಸಮಯದ & ಾ 01 & 02 ರವರು #ೋಟದ ,& ೆಲಸ ;ಾಡಲು, d«Ã¤£À §½ §AzÁUÀ, ಆ ೋ4 01 ರವರು ಾ 01 ರವರ ಾ§ÄÛ, #ೋಟದ & ೆಎ-06-<=-3014 >ೇ ನಂಬ5ನ 8ಾ ಕ@A Bಂದ -9- NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR ಟ ಂC ºÉÆqÉAiÀÄÄwÛzÀÄÝ , ಾ 01 ರವರು ೇ7-ಾಗ, ಆ ೋ4 01 ರವರು BಮDಮD>ಾß ಾEFಾ ಇದು ನಮD #ೋl, ಇ & ೆಲಸ ;ಾH ೊಳIJ#ೆKೕ>ೆ, ¤Ã£ÀÄ PÉüÀ®Ä Fಾರು ಎಂದು ಅ ಾಚE ಶಬಗ7ಂದ ೈAiÀÄÄÝ, ಾ 1 ರವರ ೊಂಟದ ಾಗ ೆO 8ಾ ಕ@Bಂ!ದ ಗು6 Pೕವ ಸQರೂಪzÀ ಾಯವನುRಂಟು;ಾH, ಾ 02 ರವರ ೇ7ೕದ ೆO ಈ 6ನ ಸುಮD>ೆ Bಮ ೆ ಗು6-ೇ>ೆ, ಮ#ೆK ಈ ಜTೕBನ ತಂ8ೆ ೆ §AzÀgÉ ¤ªÀÄä£ÀÄß fêÀ ಸUತ =ಡುವV6ಲ& ಎಂದು Wಾ ಣ ೆದ5 ೆ XಾYರುವVದು ತBZೆ[ಂದ ದೃಡಪಟ@ ]ೕ ೆ ೆ ಕಲಂ 447, 326, 504, 506 L¦¹ jÃತå ^_ಾಹ!ರಂತ ಘನ >ಾEFಾಲಯ ೆO -ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ ಸ &a-ೆ, ಮತುK ಈ -ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ ಂಕಣ 12 ರ & ಕಂಡ ಆ ೋ4 02 ರವರು ೆಎ-06-<=-3104 >ೇ 8ಾ ಕ@5ನ ªÀiÁ°ÃPÀgÁVzÀÄÝ , 6.25/12/2021 ರಂದು ೆ7 ೆ 8-30 ಗಂ8ೆ ಸಮಯದ & 8ಾ bಕ@ರನುR ಆ ೋ4 01 ರವ5 ೆ ಉಳI] ;ಾಡಲು BೕHದ ¨UÉÎ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ -ಾಖeಾPಗಳನುR XಾಜರುಪHಸಲು 6.19.08.2022 & 6.27.08.2022 ರಂದು >ೋ<ೕಸುಗಳನುR BೕHದರೂ ಸXಾ DgÉÆæ 02 gÀªÀgÀÄ ಉ-ೇಶಪfವ!ಕ ಾg 8ಾ ಕ@ರನುR XಾಜರುಪHಸ-ೇ, ಮುhiಟು@ & 133 L.JA.« >ೋ<ೕa ೆ ಉತKರ Bೕಡ-ೇ ಇರುªÀÅzÀÄ vÀ¤SɬÄAzÀ ದೃಪ<@ರು#ೆK. ಆದ5ಂದ ಆ ೋ4 02 ರವರು ಕಲಂ 174, 175, 201 ಐ.4.a 5ೕತE ^_ಾಹ! ೆಂತ ಘನ >ಾEFಾಲಯPÉÌ -ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ ಸ &a-ೆ."
The wound certificate is as follows:
"Name Rashmi Age 36 Years Sex female, Address.
W/o Umesh # M.M Kaval, (Kaggere),
Doddanaravangala Post, Tumkur.
Sent From -
Accompanied -
Brief History Alleged H/o Assault by neighbour hood field owner, he tried to run over the tractor on her by which she fell down.
Date & time of Examined 25/12/2021 at 12:45 PM. Identification Marks -
Injuries:- i) C/o pain in the right hip.
ii) Abrasions over the leg.
iii) C/o pain while walking Opinion: Right Trochanter fracture
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR I am of the opinion that above injury is of grievous injury.
Place: Gubbi Date: 14.1.2022"
11. The summary of the charge sheet filed in Crime No.60/2021 which is challenged in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 is as follows:
"17. ೇaನ ಸಂ ಪK ಾ ಾಂಶ 6>ಾಂಕ: 16/11/2021 ರಂದು ೆ7 ೆ ಸು;ಾರು 11-50 ಗಂ8ೆ ಸಮಯದ & ೆkಾJ, ೕ ಾ ಾ ಸರಹ6 ೆ ೇ5ದ hಕO>ಾರವಂಗಲ ಾ ಮದ ತಮDಯEನವರ ಾಸದ ಮ>ೆಯ ಮುಂ ಾಗ Xಾದು Xೋgರುವ ರ ೆKಯ & ಜTೕBನವ , ಾರದ & ಈ
-ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ ಅಂಕಣ 12 ರ &, ಎ1 ರವರು ಮಲD ಸಂದ ರ ೆK, ಕlೆ[ಂದ ಾUÉÎ ೆ ಕlೆ Xೋಗುವ ರ ೆKಯ & ತನR ಾ§ÄÛ ೆಎ-06-*ೆm-5261 >ೇ ಾ5ನ & ಬಂದು ಾ -01 ರವರು ಾ ೆ ೆ ಕlೆ[ಂದ ಮಲ&ಸಂದ ಕlೆ ೆ ತನR ಾಬು, ೆಎ-06-ಎ - 5905 >ೇ 6Qಚಕ ೈn ನ &, XೋಗುPKದ ¨ÉÊPÉÎ ಗು6ದ ರಭಸ ೆO ಾ -01 ರವರು ೆಳ ೆ =-ಾಗ ]ೖ ೈ >ೋವVಂ8ಾgದು ಾ;ಾನE ಸQರೂಪ ಾಯಗkಾgದು, ಾ - 01 ರವರನR ಕು5ತು ನಮD ಜTೕBನ ಸು6 ೆ ಬಂ66ೕFಾ ಈ ಸಲ ತ4oa ೊಂHರು ೆ ಮುಂ6ನ ಸಲ BನR ]ೕeೆ ಾರು ಹPKa ೊeೆ ;ಾಡು#ೆKೕ ೆಂತ Wಾ ಣ ೆದ5 ೆ XಾYರು#ಾK ೆಂತಲೂ Xಾಗು ಾ -01 ಾ§ÄÛ, ೈn TೕರA Xೊlೆದು ಸು;ಾರು 150 ರೂ ಗಳಷು@ ನಮD ಉಂಟು ;ಾHರು#ಾK>ೆಂತ ತBZೆ[ಂದ ಧೃಡಪ<@ದು, ಆ ೋ4ಯ ]ೕeೆ ಕಲಂ 324, 506, 427 ಐ.4.a.5ೕ#ಾ ^_ಾಹ! ೆಂತ ಈ -ೋ.ಾ ೋಪಣ ಪತ ಸ &a ೊಂHರು#ೆK."
The wound certificate is as follows:
"seಾ& ಆಸo#ೆ tಯದ ಪ ;ಾಣ ಪತ ಗುರು. 4 ಎಂಬ Xೆಸ5ನ ವEYKಯ ]ೕeೆ ಕಂಡು ಬಂ6ರುವ tಯ ಅಥ ಾ Wೆಟು@ಗಳ (>ೋವV ಇವರು 30 ವಷ! ವಯavನವ ಾgದು ಪರ]ೕಶQರಯE ಾಸ ಾgದು ಕUÉÎÃರು
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR ತುಮಕೂರು ಾ ೆ[ಂದ ಬಂ6ದು *ೊ#ೆಯ & 90 ಅ ೕeïØ ಆA.<.K. ಾಯಣಗ7ಂದ 18- 12-21 ರಂದು 11-50 ಸಮಯದ & ೆಳgನ ಾಯಗಳI ಉಂ8ಾgಬಹು-ೆಂದು ಕಂಡು ಬಂ6-ೆ.
ಗುರುPನ hXೆRಗಳI : -
ಾಯ ೊಂಡ ವEYKಯನುR ೆಳ ೆ ಸU ;ಾHದರವV wದಲ ಸಲ H.XೆC.<. ತುಮಕೂರು 18- 12-21 ಸxಳದ & 2-50 4.ಎಂ. 6ನ >ೋH-ಾ ೆ ಮತುK ಸಮಯದ & ಪ5ೕ_ೆ ನlೆa-ಾಗ ಈ ೆಳಕಂಡ ಾಯಗಳI ಕಂಡುಬಂ6-ೆ.
(1) tend erhen from right hip to right knee According to X-ray No.203113 DPD 202101933 Thight at ap Noorboious scan ನನR ಅyWಾ ದ & ]ೕeಾOzaದ {ಾಯಗಳI (1) Is sample in nahna C E days ಸಮಯದ ಒಳ ೆ ಉಂ8ಾgರಬಹುದು ಸxಳ : Tumkur 6>ಾಂಕ: 26/12/21 RO/ 10/1/22."
12. If the wound certificates and summary of the charge sheets in all the petitions are read in tandem, what would unmistakably emerge is that, offences under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC are prima facie established in the subject crimes.
13. It becomes apposite to refer to the judgments of the Apex Court on the interpretation of Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR 13.1. The Apex Court in the case of MATHAI v. STATE OF KERALA1, lays down the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 326 of the IPC. The judgment reads as follows:
".... .... ....
8. We find that PW 1 is the victim of the assault allegedly made by the accused. His evidence is clear and cogent. As he was a victim, in the absence of any material to show as to why he would falsely implicate the accused, his evidence has been rightly relied upon. PW 2's evidence has also corroborated his evidence.
9. The residual question is whether the factual position indicates that any grievous hurt was caused and whether the weapon used was a dangerous weapon. The doctor who examined the injured noticed following injuries:
1. Lacerated wound over the left posterior parietal region of the head.
2. Fracture of the left upper second incisor tooth involving the pulp and the root.
Alleged cause of the injury is "assault". Opinion could be as alleged.
He identified his signature in Ext. P-3 discharge certificate.
10. Section 325 deals with punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.
11. Section 326 deals with offence of voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
12. Section 326 provides that whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument 1 (2005) 3 SCC 260
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance, or by means of any substance which is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and also with a liability to pay a fine.
13. Sections 325 and 326, like the two sections immediately preceding, provide the ordinary punishment and punishment under certain aggravating circumstances of the offences mentioned thereunder. The two latter sections apply to the case of causing "grievous hurt" and the immediately preceding two sections to the case of "hurt".
14. "Grievous hurt" has been defined in Section 320 IPC, which reads as follows:
"320. Grievous hurt.--The following kinds of hurt only are designated as 'grievous':
First.--Emasculation.
Secondly.--Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.
Thirdly.--Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.
Fourthly.--Privation of any member or joint. Fifthly.--Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint. Sixthly.--Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.
Seventhly.--Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.
Eighthly.--Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits."
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR
15. Some hurts which are not like those hurts which are mentioned in the first seven clauses, are obviously distinguished from a slight hurt, may nevertheless be more serious. Thus a wound may cause intense pain, prolonged disease or lasting injury to the victim, although it does not fall within any of the first seven clauses. Before a conviction for the sentence of grievous hurt can be passed, one of the injuries defined in Section 320 must be strictly proved, and the eighth clause is no exception to the general rule of law that a penal statute must be construed strictly.
16. The expression "any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death"
[Ed. : Section 326] has to be gauged taking note of the heading of the section. What would constitute a "dangerous weapon" would depend upon the facts of each case and no generalisation can be made.
17. The heading of the section provides some insight into the factors to be considered. The essential ingredients to attract Section 326 are : (1) voluntarily causing a hurt; (2) hurt caused must be a grievous hurt; and (3) the grievous hurt must have been caused by dangerous weapons or means. As was noted by this Court in State of U.P. v. Indrajeet [(2000) 7 SCC 249 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 1338] there is no such thing as a regular or earmarked weapon for committing murder or for that matter a hurt. Whether a particular article can per se cause any serious wound or grievous hurt or injury has to be determined factually. As noted above, the evidence of the doctor (PW 5) clearly shows that the hurt or the injury that was caused was covered under the expression "grievous hurt" as defined under Section 320 IPC. The inevitable conclusion is that a grievous hurt was caused. It is not that in every case a stone would constitute a dangerous weapon. It would depend upon the facts of the case. At this juncture, it would be relevant to note that in some provisions e.g. Sections 324 and 326 the expression "dangerous weapon" is used. In some other more serious offences the expression used is "deadly weapon" (e.g. Sections 397 and 398). The facts involved in a
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR particular case, depending upon various factors like size, sharpness, would throw light on the question whether the weapon was a dangerous or deadly weapon or not. That would determine whether in the case Section 325 or Section 326 would be applicable."
(Emphasis supplied) 13.2. The Apex Court in the case of ANUJ SINGH ALIAS RAMANUJ SINGH ALIAS SETH SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR2, lays down the ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 324 of the IPC. The judgment reads as follows:
".... .... ....
20. It is a well-known fact that the term "hurt" simply means performing an act which leads to physical pain, injury or any disease to a person. At times, hurt may be caused voluntarily or it can by caused by using dangerous weapons or mean. A person will be liable to have caused hurt voluntarily through dangerous weapons and means under Section 324 IPC which reads as under:--
"324. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.--Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term 2 2022 SCC OnLine SC 497
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both."
21. To establish an offence under Sec 324 IPC, the presence of following ingredients is a must which are as follows:--
1. Voluntary hurt caused to another person by the accused, and
2. Such hurt was caused:
a. By any instrument used for shooting, cutting or stabbing, or any other instrument likely to cause death, or b. By fire or other heated instruments, or c. By poison or other corrosive substance, or d. By any explosive substance, or e. By a substance that is dangerous for the human body to swallow, inhale, or receive through blood, or f. By an animal.
22. When a person commits an offence of voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons and means under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code, then such person shall be punished with imprisonment for a period of three years, or with fine.
23. In the case at hand, it is evident from the evidence of prosecution witnesses that the two appellants have caused hurt on the body of the informant, PW-8 by using firearm on account of an altercation which took place between the appellants and the informant PW-8. It also stands corroborated from the evidence of the prosecution witness that there existed previous enmity between the parties due to a land dispute and the same can be perceived from their acts. Thus, the charge of Section 324 IPC stands established against the two appellants. Once the charge against the appellants under Section 324 IPC of
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR voluntarily causing injuries by firearm, which is a dangerous weapon stands established, they cannot escape the punishment for using arms prescribed by Section 27 of the Arms Act."
(Emphasis supplied)
14. If the law laid down by the Apex Court in the afore- quoted judgments is applied to the facts of the cases in subject petitions, what would unmistakably emerge is that, this Court should not exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to obliterate the said crimes. The ingredients of the offences under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC as stated by the Apex Court in the afore-quoted judgments are prima facie established in the subject crimes. The pendency of a civil suit is not a license to assault in the manner that the assault has taken place in the cases at hand, as the wound certificates indicate grievous injuries, which were sustained by the victims in both the crimes, pursuant to the assault. This Court cannot enter into the maze of facts as obtained in the cases at hand. In such circumstances, if this Court would exercise its jurisdiction and obliterate said crimes, it would be putting a premium on the act of the assault by accused against the
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:800 CRL.P No. 9889 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 8634 of 2023 CRL.P No. 4198 of 2024 HC-KAR complainant or the complainant against the accused, as it is a case of a case and counter case.
15. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) All the three petitions are rejected.
(ii) Interim orders of any kind subsisting in any of these petitions, shall stand dissolved.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38