IPC Section 325 — Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt

Judgments citing IPC Section 325

1. Nyamathabad Chandrasekhar @ Shekar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 05 January, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana5 Jan 2023

   Case Name: Nyamathabad Chandrasekhar @ Shekar vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 05 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 05 January, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Revision – Section 307 IPC – Reduction of Charge to Section 325 IPC – Bail Application Key Legal Propositions 1. The evidence of a consistent eyewitness and injured party (P.W.2) is reliable and should not be easily disregarded. 2. Hostility of a witness to material object recovery (P.W.6) does not necessarily dilute the prosecution’s case if corroborated by other evidence. 3. A conviction under Section 307 IPC can be altered to Section 325 IPC if the intention to cause death is not clearly established, and the act appears to be a result of a fight or altercation. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner/accused challenged the conviction under Section 307 IPC by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Bodhan, which was affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. The charges stemmed from an incident where the accused stabbed the complainant (P.W.2) multiple times following a dispute over a lease agreement for a butchering business. The petitioner sou

2. Andyarragani Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana9 Nov 2023

   Case Name: Andyarragani Sreenu vs The State of Telangana on 09 November, 2023 Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 09 November, 2023 Bench: Sri Justice K. Surender Subject: Criminal Appeal – Reduction of Sentence – Grave and Sudden Provocation – Indian Penal Code Sections 304-Part I, 509, 325 Key Legal Propositions 1. Grave and sudden provocation can be a mitigating factor in sentencing for offences under the Indian Penal Code, even if it does not amount to complete exemption from liability. 2. The severity of the sentence can be reduced considering the circumstances of the offence, including the act of provocation and the nature of the injury caused. 3. Courts have the discretion to modify sentences based on considerations of justice and equity, particularly when the appellant has dependents. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arises from a conviction under Sections 325, 509, and 304-Part I of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellant/Accused was found guilty of causing the death of the deceased after an altercation following an initial incident of misbehavior towards PW1. The trial court sentenced him to imprisonment and fine

3. Dr. Binduvani vs The State of Telangana & Anr. on 17 April, 2023

   High Court of High Court for State of Telangana17 Apr 2023

   Case Name: Dr. Binduvani vs The State of Telangana & Anr. on 17 April, 2023 Court: The High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Date of Judgment: 17 April, 2023 Bench: Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy Subject: Criminal Appeal, Compromise of Offence, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Key Legal Propositions 1. Courts may facilitate compromise between parties in criminal cases, particularly where the offence is not heinous in nature. 2. Compromise can be a valid ground for quashing criminal proceedings, subject to appropriate conditions. 3. Payment of compensation to a welfare fund can be a condition for accepting a compromise and closing criminal proceedings. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Appeal arose from a case involving offences under Sections 325, 417 & 506(1) IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs (POA) Act. The Appellant (Complainant) and Respondent No. 2 (Accused) sought compromise of the case through I.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2023, requesting the High Court to permit the compromise and quash the FIR. The matter was referred to the High Court Legal Services Committee for verification and recording of the compromise. Held: A. On Compromise and Closu

4. Kamruddin & Ors. vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. on 26 July, 2023

   High Court of Chhattisgarh26 Jul 2023

   Case Name: Kamruddin & Ors. vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. on 26 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur Date of Judgment: 26 July 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Subject: Criminal Appeal – Assault, Injury, Attempt to Murder, Rioting Key Legal Propositions 1. For conviction under Section 307 IPC, intention or knowledge to commit murder must be established, not merely the causing of injury. 2. Grievous injuries alone are insufficient for a Section 307 conviction; the prosecution must prove the intent or knowledge of the accused to cause death. 3. Where the prosecution fails to establish intent to commit murder, alteration of the charge from Section 307 to Section 326 IPC may be appropriate if grievous injuries are proven. Judgment Summary Background: These criminal appeals arise from two separate FIRs stemming from the same incident on 18 April 2000. The appellants were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Korba, for offences including rioting, assault, and attempt to murder. The appeals challenge the conviction and sentencing. One appellant (Sakeela Khatoon) died during the pendency of the appeal, leading to its dismissal re

5. DINESH KUMAR vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) on 02 February, 2023 & YOGESH KUMAR vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) on 02 February, 2023

   High Court of Delhi2 Feb 2023

   Case Name: DINESH KUMAR vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) on 02 February, 2023 & YOGESH KUMAR vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) on 02 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 02 February, 2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Appeal – Sentence Reduction Key Legal Propositions 1. Where an appeal is limited to the sentence and not the merits of the conviction, the court may consider reducing the sentence based on the age of the case, the conduct of the appellants, and their current circumstances. 2. Prolonged litigation and the appellants’ engagement in meaningful employment and family responsibilities are relevant factors for sentence reduction. 3. A court may reduce the remaining portion of a sentence if requiring its completion would not serve a useful purpose, considering the overall circumstances. Judgment Summary Background: The present appeals under Section 374 Cr.P.C. were filed against a judgment dated 23.05.2009, convicting the appellants under Sections 325/34 of the IPC and sentencing them to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. The appellants sought a reduction of sentence, arguing that the incident occurred 17 y

6. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi vs Prem Pal Singh & Ors on 12 October, 2023

   High Court of Delhi12 Oct 2023

   Case Name: The State Govt of NCT of Delhi vs Prem Pal Singh & Ors on 12 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 12.10.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Revision Petition – Discharge of Accused – SC/ST Act – IPC – Remand for Reconsideration Key Legal Propositions 1. A trial court must provide reasoned orders when discharging accused persons, particularly concerning sections of law for which a chargesheet has been filed. 2. To attract offences under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, the offensive act must occur in public view, which includes the presence of impartial bystanders not closely associated with either party. 3. A finding on one issue does not preclude the need to address all issues raised in the chargesheet and supplementary chargesheet before a trial court. Judgment Summary Background: The present petition under Sections 399 and 401 of the Cr.P.C. challenges the order of the Additional Sessions Judge discharging accused persons under Sections 354/379 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the SC/ST Act. The case originated from a 2007 FIR alleging casteist remarks, attempted poisoning of a dog, assault, robbery, and threats. The Tria

7. Sakshi Khurana vs The State Government of NCT of Delhi on 11 August, 2023

   High Court of Delhi11 Aug 2023

   Case Name: Sakshi Khurana vs The State Government of NCT of Delhi on 11 August, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 11 August, 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Law, Quashing of FIR, Section 482 CrPC, SC/ST Act, Matrimonial Dispute, Settlement Key Legal Propositions 1. High Courts possess the power under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIRs even those registered under special statutes like the SC/ST Act, provided the underlying objective of the Act is not contravened. 2. When a dispute is primarily private or civil in nature, and a genuine settlement is reached, continuing legal proceedings may amount to an abuse of process. 3. Courts should consider the specific facts and circumstances of each case, including the likelihood of conviction and the nature of the offense, when deciding whether to exercise its power to quash. Judgment Summary Background: The petition sought quashing of FIR No. 1094/2022 registered under Sections 3(1), (R), (S) of the SC/ST Act, 1989, based on allegations stemming from a matrimonial dispute. The complainant alleged abuse and use of casteist slurs by the petitioner. However, the parties reached a settl

8. INOX AIR PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs MR. ARUN RATHI on 05 July, 2023

   High Court of Delhi5 Jul 2023

   Case Name: INOX AIR PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs MR. ARUN RATHI on 05 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 05.07.2023 Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI Subject: Contempt of Court, Civil Imprisonment, Remission, Delhi Prison Rules Key Legal Propositions 1. Civil imprisonment imposed as a consequence of contempt of court is a substantive sentence and not merely a punitive measure. 2. The definition of “prisoner” and eligibility criteria for remission under the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, are inclusive and do not explicitly exclude civil prisoners. 3. Deprivation of personal liberty must be in accordance with established legal procedures, which cannot be arbitrary, unfair, or unreasonable, invoking Article 21 of the Constitution. Judgment Summary Background: The present application concerns a request for remission of sentence by the Judgment Debtor, Arun Rathi, who is undergoing three months of civil imprisonment for contempt of court. He failed to comply with a court order to deposit Rs. 5.05 crores. The Jail Authorities rejected his representation for remission, relying on the Rules not explicitly providing for it for civil prisoners. The Decree Holde

9. PARVEEN ALIAS MINTOO AND ORS. vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. on 02 August, 2023

   High Court of Delhi2 Aug 2023

   Case Name: Court: Date of Judgment: Bench: Subject: Key Legal Propositions 1. Quashing of FIR is permissible when parties have amicably settled their disputes. 2. Addition of a serious charge like Section 308 IPC without proper justification weakens the prosecution's case. 3. Courts may consider the wishes of the parties and the bleak chances of conviction when deciding on quashing petitions. Judgment Summary Background: The present petition sought quashing of FIR No. 330 dated 12.08.2013 registered under Sections 323/427/452/34 IPC at PS Burari, Delhi. The FIR was initially lodged based on a complaint of assault and damage to property. Subsequently, Section 325 and then Section 308 IPC were added during investigation. The parties have now reached a compromise. Held: A. On Quashing of FIR: Majority View: The Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and all related proceedings, noting the amicable settlement between the parties and the weak prospects of conviction, particularly concerning the addition of Section 308 IPC without clear justification. Dissenting View: None. B. On Addition of Section 308 IPC: Majority View: The Court observed that the addition of Section 308 I

10. Gopi Nisha Mallah vs State of NCT of Delhi on 31 October, 2023

    High Court of Delhi31 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Gopi Nisha Mallah vs State of NCT of Delhi on 31 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 31 October, 2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Writ Petition – Furlough – Rejection of Furlough Application – Application of Mind – Jail Conduct Key Legal Propositions 1. Furlough and parole are progressive correctional measures aimed at maintaining social ties, self-confidence, and psychological well-being of prisoners. 2. Denial of furlough based solely on the nature of the offence, without considering the prisoner’s conduct and eligibility under the relevant rules, is erroneous. 3. A single instance of late surrender after previously granted parole, especially when followed by timely surrender on subsequent parole, should not be a definitive ground for denying furlough. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner, a life convict serving imprisonment in Central Jail No. 14, Mandoli, Delhi, sought quashing of an order rejecting his application for first spell of furlough and a direction for its grant. The rejection was based on the nature of the offence, an adverse police report, and a prior instance of late surrender after eme

11. State of NCT of Delhi vs Faizal Riyaz on 20 January, 2023

    High Court of Delhi20 Jan 2023

    Case Name: State of NCT of Delhi vs Faizal Riyaz on 20 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 20 January, 2023 Bench: Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav Subject: Criminal Appeal – Assault – Acquittal – Appreciation of Evidence Key Legal Propositions 1. An appellate court has the power to re-appreciate, review, and reweigh evidence in an appeal against acquittal, and is not limited to determining if the acquittal is "perverse." 2. An appellate court can arrive at its own conclusion on evidence, considering both questions of fact and law, but should not interfere with a reasonable view taken by the trial court. 3. The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction; failure to do so warrants upholding an acquittal. Judgment Summary Background: This is a criminal appeal filed by the State of NCT of Delhi against the judgment of acquittal dated 11.11.2014, in a case registered under Sections 325/34 of the IPC, 1860. The charges stemmed from an alleged assault on the complainant by the respondents during a family gathering. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution’s case not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. He

12. Ayush Chaudhary & Anr. vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. on 09 February, 2023

    High Court of Delhi9 Feb 2023

    Case Name: Ayush Chaudhary & Anr. vs State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. on 09 February, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 09.02.2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR – Compromise – Grievous Hurt – Section 482 Cr.P.C. Key Legal Propositions 1. The High Court’s inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding must be exercised sparingly, with caution, and to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process. 2. A mere apology letter, even from the parents of the accused, does not constitute a valid compromise deed for the purpose of quashing an FIR. 3. The gravity of the offence and the trauma suffered by the complainant are crucial considerations when deciding whether to quash an FIR, even if a compromise is claimed. Judgment Summary Background: The Petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 133/2022 registered under Sections 323/325/34 IPC at PS CR Park, Delhi, alleging assault and grievous hurt. The Petitioners claimed a compromise had been reached with the Respondent No. 2/Complainant, supported by an apology letter from their parents. The State opposed the quashing, highlighting the s

13. Ramesh Wadhera vs State on 16 May, 2023

    High Court of Delhi16 May 2023

    Case Name: Ramesh Wadhera vs State on 16 May, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 16.05.2023 Bench: Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Subject: Criminal Appeal, Sentence Reduction, Cancellation of NBW Key Legal Propositions 1. An appeal can be limited to the issue of sentencing, foregoing challenges to the conviction itself. 2. A court may reduce a sentence if the appellant has undergone a significant period of incarceration, demonstrated positive contributions to society, and poses no further threat. 3. Cancellation of a Non-Bailable Warrant can be granted based on reasons stated in an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Judgment Summary Background: The present appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. concerned a conviction under Sections 325/307 of the IPC and Sections 27/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959. The appellant sought a reduction of sentence, not challenging the conviction itself. A concurrent application sought cancellation of a Non-Bailable Warrant issued against the appellant. The incident dates back to 2004, and the appellant had already spent over three months in judicial custody. Held: A. On Cancellation of NBW: Majority View: The Non-Bailab

14. Imran vs State on 16 August, 2023

    High Court of Delhi16 Aug 2023

    Case Name: Imran vs State on 16 August, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi Date of Judgment: 16 August, 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Bail Application – Murder/Grievous Hurt – Section 439 CrPC – Assessment of Prima Facie Case – Role of Accused – Duration of Custody Key Legal Propositions 1. The grant of bail is a judicial discretion to be exercised considering the nature of the offence, the accused’s position relative to the victim and witnesses, and the potential for tampering with evidence or absconding. 2. At the bail stage, the court is not required to conduct a detailed evidentiary analysis or a mini-trial, but must form a prima facie opinion regarding the basis for granting bail, especially in serious offences. 3. The existence of a common objective amongst accused persons is a matter for determination during trial upon full appreciation of evidence, and prolonged detention pending trial cannot be solely based on an alleged common intention. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner, Imran, sought bail in connection with FIR No. 176/2019 registered under Sections 307/323/34 IPC, which was later amended to include Section 302 IP

15. State vs Ajay @ Badakka & Ors. on 13 July, 2023

    High Court of Delhi13 Jul 2023

    Case Name: State vs Ajay @ Badakka & Ors. on 13 July, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 13 July, 2023 Bench: Justice Suresh Kumar Kait & Justice Neena Bansal Krishna Subject: Criminal Law – Attempt to Murder – Section 307 IPC – Appreciation of Evidence – Sentencing Key Legal Propositions 1. The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt to secure a conviction under Section 307 IPC. 2. The absence of a clear motive, coupled with inconsistencies in evidence, can lead to an acquittal under Section 307 IPC, with conviction for a lesser offence like Section 325 IPC being appropriate. 3. A trial court’s decision to sentence accused persons to the period already undergone, considering their jail tenure and potential for reformation, is a valid exercise of discretion, subject to imposition of statutory fines. Judgment Summary Background: This Criminal Leave Petition challenges the judgment of the Sessions Court which, while acquitting the accused of attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC), convicted them for causing grievous hurt (Section 325 IPC) and sentenced them to the period already undergone in custody. The State argues that the trial court failed to

16. DEVENDER KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. on 27 September, 2023

    High Court of Delhi27 Sept 2023

    Case Name: DEVENDER KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. on 27 September, 2023 Court: HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment: 27th September, 2023 Bench: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN Subject: Service Law – Termination – Reinstatement – Back Wages – ‘No Work No Pay’ Principle – Misrepresentation in Attestation Form Key Legal Propositions 1. The principle of ‘no work no pay’ is not universally inapplicable and can be invoked where termination is attributable to the employee’s conduct. 2. Where reinstatement follows imposition of a lesser punishment for proven misconduct, back wages, continuity of service, and consequential benefits do not automatically follow. 3. Granting full continuity of service with all benefits except back wages, following reinstatement for misrepresentation, is a benevolent act by the employer and does not warrant judicial intervention. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner challenged orders denying back wages for the period of his termination and subsequent reinstatement. He was terminated from service in the Central Industrial Security Force for suppressing information regarding a criminal case in his

17. Chander Shekhar & Ors. vs State Through SHO & Anr. on 23 May, 2023

    High Court of Delhi23 May 2023

    Case Name: Chander Shekhar & Ors. vs State Through SHO & Anr. on 23 May, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 23.05.2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR – Compromise/Settlement – Offences under Sections 323/325/452/354B/506/509/34 IPC Key Legal Propositions 1. A criminal proceeding can be quashed in view of a genuine compromise between the parties, especially when the allegations involve non-cognizable offences or offences not affecting public policy gravely. 2. Courts may consider the terms of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) entered into between parties as evidence of a genuine compromise and settlement. 3. The presence of parties before the court and their affirmation of having resolved their disputes is a significant factor in determining the appropriateness of quashing a criminal proceeding. Judgment Summary Background: The present petition sought the quashing of FIR No. 325/2016 registered under Sections 323/325/452/354B/506/509/34 IPC at P.S. Bindapur, alleging physical assault and other offences. The FIR was lodged based on the statement of Respondent No. 2. The petitioners and respondent no. 2 ent

18. Mahinder Singh And Ors vs The State And Anr on 18 January, 2023

    High Court of Delhi18 Jan 2023

    Case Name: Mahinder Singh And Ors vs The State And Anr on 18 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 18 January, 2023 Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma Subject: Criminal Law – Quashing of FIR – Compromise – Abuse of Process Key Legal Propositions 1. The High Court possesses inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, particularly when an amicable settlement has been reached between the parties. 2. Criminal proceedings arising from disputes with a predominant civil element may be quashed to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice. 3. Courts may consider quashing FIRs where the continuation of proceedings would not serve any useful purpose, especially when the parties desire to maintain peace and harmony. Judgment Summary Background: The present petition sought the quashing of FIR No. 0752/2022 registered under Sections 452/325/506/34 IPC at Police Station Mundka, alleging assault by the petitioners upon the complainant. A compromise deed dated 23.12.2022 was executed between the parties, and the complainant appeared in court to state his willingness to withdraw the FIR. Held: A. On Quashi

19. Shyam Ali vs. Union of India and Anr. on 06 January, 2023

    High Court of Delhi6 Jan 2023

    Case Name: Shyam Ali vs. Union of India and Anr. on 06 January, 2023 Court: High Court of Delhi Date of Judgment: 06 January, 2023 Bench: Justice Suresh Kumar Kait & Justice Neena Bansal Krishna Subject: Service Law – Dismissal from Service – Suppression of Information – Character Verification – ITBP Act, 1992 Key Legal Propositions 1. Candidates seeking employment in security forces are expected to possess impeccable character and integrity, and any suppression of criminal antecedents is a serious issue. 2. A candidate’s false declaration regarding pendency of a criminal case, even if subsequently acquitted with benefit of doubt, can be grounds for dismissal, particularly during the initial stages of employment/training. 3. An inquiry into the conduct of a candidate is not necessarily required before removal from service if the suppression of information is discovered during the character verification process *before* formal appointment. Judgment Summary Background: The petitioner was appointed as a Constable Recruit in the ITBP. During character verification, it was discovered that an FIR was registered against him in 2013. He had stated 'No' in the attestation form regard

20. Chhatrapalsinh Chandrakishorbhai Vala vs State of Gujarat on 03 October, 2023

    High Court of Gujarat3 Oct 2023

    Case Name: Chhatrapalsinh Chandrakishorbhai Vala vs State of Gujarat on 03 October, 2023 Court: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad Date of Judgment: 03/10/2023 Bench: Justice A.Y. Kogje and Justice Mauna M. Bhatt Subject: Preventive Detention, Habeas Corpus, Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 Key Legal Propositions 1. Reliance on previous detention orders, even if quashed, is permissible if not the grounds of those orders are not considered. 2. A detention order is vitiated if the detaining authority relies on unverified statements of secret witnesses without demonstrating proper verification procedures. 3. Detention based on a likelihood of committing offenses must be linked to offenses affecting public order, not merely general criminal activity. Judgment Summary Background: The petition challenges a detention order dated 22.07.2023 passed under Section 3(2) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985, alleging that the petitioner, a ‘dangerous person’ with prior offenses, is likely to continue antisocial activities. The petitioner argues the order is invalid due to lack of application of mind, reliance on unverified secret witness sta