Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Deepak Ojha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 February, 2016

                                                                Cra.398.2015

     15.02.2016
            Shri Mahaveer Pathak, counsel for the appellants.
            Smt.   Sangeeta     Pachouri,   Public    Prosecutor,   for   the
     respondent/State.

I.A.7149/2015 and I.A.No.8237/2015 which are the applications preferred on behalf of the appellants under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of their remaining jail sentence and grant of bail are taken up and considered. Reply of the State has also been taken into account.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. Learned counsel for the appellants primarily contends that the offence under Section 326A of IPC is not made out since there is no grievous injury sustained by the prosecutrix.

Perusal of the provision contained under Section 326A of IPC clearly indicates that sustenance of grievous injury is not sine qua non for the offence punishable under Section 326A of IPC. Even if minor injury is caused by throwing of acid, the said provision of Section 326A of IPC can get attracted. Dr. Mukesh Gurjar (PW-4) has categorically stated that the burn injuries were caused by throwing acid which was further corroborated by FSL report Ex.P-9 and therefore this Court is of the considered view that the appellants, for the time being, are not entitled to grant of suspension of sentence.

Accordingly, both the IAs stand rejected.

(Sheel Nagu) Judge pd