THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs BATTEGOWDA & ORS.

BENCH: JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA & JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

FACTS:

In the present case, on 18/09/1999 an argument took place between the complainant and the accused near a construction site nearby their neighbourhood. The accused alleged that this piece of land was sold to him and his sons and the mother of another person. The dispute was for the delivery of the property that was alleged to be sold. The fact of blood relation between the accused and complainant is to be noted. They are blood relatives, as they brothers and the sons of the accused are the nephews of the complainant. The dispute was escalated by the demolition of a wall by the accused and his sons the in that specific property. When the dispute got extremely heated, the complainant tried to reason with the accused who was his brother, but he was beyond any reasoning at this point. Whilst they were arguing a son of the complainant stabbed the complainant two-three times. The injuries sustained were so bad that the intestines of the complainant had bulged through the wounds. Before he could call for help, the accused restrained him from the back and one of the sons stabbed him in the chest and he had fallen. The son of the complainant rushed to the scene but, before he could reach there his father had collapsed onto the ground. The son of the complainant also sustained injuries inflicted by the accused and his sons. The FIR was created accusing them of committing crimes under sections 341/324/307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Later they were tried for the same provisions and the Sessions Court at Mysore concluded that there was no intention to kill on behalf of the accused and they convicted under section 326 and 307 read with 34 of IPC, 1860. The conviction was for 6 years of rigorous imprisonment which was later shortened to 2 year on appeal by the accused. On, appeal the father was acquitted on ground of lack of evidence. The sons of the accused also got decreased sentences of one getting just 16 days and conversion of charge from 326 to 324. Whereas, the other son’s sentence was reduced from 6 to 2 years in prison on appeal. 

ISSUE:

The crucial question before this Court, however, is whether the Accused No.2 whose conviction was converted from Section 326 to Section 324 of the IPC and he has been sentenced to only 16 days of imprisonment, was proper, inasmuch it has been done after the High Court came to the conclusion that Section 34 of the IPC even for the Accused no.2 (one of the sons) is not made out.

JUDGEMENT WITH REASONING:

The Court decided that the reduction sentences of both the sons of the accused was not accurate and over turned partly the decision of the High Court. The Accused No. 2 and 3 will have to serve for a period of 2 years under rigorous imprisonment stated the Apex Court.

The accused had taken the defence of there existed no intention of cause injuries to the complainant, but the court reasoned by stating that, even if it is assumed it is true, it cannot be denied that common intention and the pre-meeting of minds can take place at the spur of the moment itself during the course of the incident. These reasons lead to the Apex Court to partly overturn the decision of the High Court. Furthermore, the High Court failed to provide any reason to why they excluded section 34 of IPC, 1860. 

ANALYSIS:

Through judgement the court has established the fact that the severity of injuries caused by individuals acting with common intention cannot justify reducing a harsher punishment to a lighter one. The extent of injuries caused is not linked to the intention behind and the court also stated that pre-meeting minds is also not necessary and intention can be made at the spur of the moment. 

The Supreme Court with precedent seeks to protect the rights of individuals who have been harmed by such perpetrators and ensure that justice in provided. Also to add to this the SC is also not shy to correct the mistakes made the High Court and give a stern reminder to have the person aggrieved by the actions of the accused in mind and  also in-calculate the existence intention that can be created at the spur of the moment due to blood relation between the accused.