Karnataka High Court: A criminal petition was filed under Section 482 CrPC praying to set aside the order of trial Judge; wherein a Single Judge Bench comprising of K.N. Phaneendra, J. held that the trial Judge erred in convicting the petitioner under Section 307 IPC.
The petitioner was accused of inter alia, offence under Section 307. It was alleged by the complainant that the accused was driving a Scorpio car. When the complainant tried to stop the said vehicle, the accused drove the vehicle backwards and stopped thereafter. The accused was charge-sheeted for offence under Section 307. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted that the contents of the FIR do not show any material to attract the offence under Section 307 IPC.
The High Court perused Section 307 IPC and was of the opinion that in order to attract the provisions of Section 307, there must be intention or knowledge on part of the accused. In such circumstance, if that act of the accused caused death of the victim, he would have been guilty of murder; but if the person survives then the offence under Section 307 is made out. Also, irrespective of the injuries sustained by the party, there may be constitution of offence under Section 307 of IPC.
In the instant case, the Court found that, there was no allegation in the FIR to show that the complainant was behind the car when accused drove the vehicle backwards. Also none of the witnesses made any allegations that the accused tried to run the car over the complainant. The Court was of the view that there was no material to establish that the accused had any knowledge or intention to do away with the life of the complainant.
Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner under Section 307 IPC were quashed. [Faizal v. Mohamad Aris, Crl. Petition No. 6826 of 2017, order dated 5.12.2017]