There is no merit in the contention that the statement of Medical Officer that there is no danger to life unless there is dislocation or rupture of the thyroid bone due to strangulation means that the accused did not intend, or have the knowledge, that their act would cause death. The circumstances of this case clearly attract the second part of this Section since the act resulted in injury No. 5 which is a ligature mark of 34 cm x 0.5 cm. It must be noted that Section 307 Indian Penal Code provides for imprisonment for life if the act causes 'hurt'. It does not require that the hurt should be grievous or of any particular degree. The intention to cause death is clearly attributable to the accused since the victim was strangulated after throwing a telephone wire around his neck and telling him he should die. We also do not find any merit in the contention on behalf of the Appellant that there was no intention to cause death because the victim admitted that the accused were not armed with weapons. Very few persons would normally describe the Thums-up bottle and a telephone wire used as weapons. That the victim honestly admitted that the accused did not have any weapons cannot be held against him and in favour of the accused.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 466 of 2014
Decided On: 20.02.2014
Pasupuleti Siva Ramakrishna Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
H.L. Dattu and S.A. Bobde, JJ.
Citation: (2014) 5 SCC 369.
