November 20, 2000 : The Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur has partly allowed the appeal of Bharat Ram, who was convicted by a lower court under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (attempt to murder), and modified his conviction to a lesser offence under Section 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder). The court reduced his sentence to the period already undergone in custody, citing the nature of the injuries, the long passage of time since the 1991 incident, and the prolonged trial.
The judgment, delivered by Acting Chief Justice R. S. Garg, came in an appeal against the 1999 verdict of the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, which had sentenced Bharat Ram to five years of rigorous imprisonment for attempting to murder one Ram Manik. The incident had its roots in an old enmity between the two men. According to the prosecution, on June 12, 1991, around 11 p.m., Bharat Ram attacked Ram Manik with a tabbal (a sharp cutting weapon), inflicting several injuries.
During trial, the prosecution relied on the testimony of the victim, his wife Sushila Kumari, and daughter Kumari Champa, who all identified the appellant as the assailant. The medical report by Dr. R. Jeetpure recorded four incised wounds on the victim’s shoulder, neck, arm, and chest, though all were categorized as simple injuries. The defence argued that the complainant, who himself faced a separate case under Section 326 IPC based on a complaint by the appellant, had fabricated the charges to avenge their personal rivalry.
The High Court, after reviewing the evidence, found that the victim and his family members were credible witnesses and that the appellant was indeed responsible for the assault. However, Justice Garg noted that since the injuries were simple and not life-threatening, the case did not satisfy the requirements of “intention to murder” under Section 307. Instead, the nature of the assault suggested knowledge or intention that could amount to culpable homicide if death had occurred, bringing it within the scope of Section 308 IPC.
Taking into account that the incident occurred more than three decades ago and that Bharat Ram had already spent about one year in custody, the court reduced the punishment to the period already undergone. The court also imposed a fine of ₹7,000, with a default imprisonment of two years. The amount, upon recovery, is to be paid to the victim, Ram Manik.
The court directed that the release warrant be issued immediately through the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Ambikapur.
Case Reference : Criminal Appeal No. 54 of 2000, Bharat Ram vs. State of M.P.
