Supreme Court: Prosecution has duty to explain whether a sharp-edged weapon is used as blunt weapon if lacerated wounds are caused to victim

The postmortem report prepared by Dr. N.L. Jain shows that on the body of Jagdeo were found three bruises and a hematoma. On the body of Padum were found four lacerated wounds and two bruises. According to the eye-witnesses the two men were attacked with lathis, spears and axes but that clearly stands falsified by the medical evidence. Not one of the injuries found on the person of Jagdeo and Padum could be caused by a spear or an axe. The High Court however refused to attach any importance to this aspect of the matter by saying that the witnesses had not stated that the miscreants dealt axe blows from the sharp-side or used the spear as a piercing weapon". According to the High Court axes and spears may have been used from the blunt side and therefore the evidence of the eye-witnesses could safely be accepted. We should have thought that normally when the witness says that an axe or a spear is used there is no warrant for supposing that what the witness means is that the blunt side of the weapon was used. If that be the implication it is the duty of the prosecution to obtain a clarification from the witness as to whether a sharp-edged or a piercing instrument was used as blunt weapon. {Para 11}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 142 of 1970

Decided On: 19.03.1974

Hallu and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M. Hameedullah Beg and Y.V. Chandrachud, JJ.

Author: Y.V. Chandrachud, J.

Citation: Citation: 1974 INSC 60, MANU/SC/0136/1974,

AIR 1974 SUPREME COURT 1936, (1974) 4 SCC 300, 

Print Page

Supreme Court: Lacerated wounds and Contusion are possible only by hard and blunt object and not by sharp-edged weapon

The injuries suffered by the complainant which have been reproduced in the judgment of the High Court show that there were three lacerated wounds and one contusion. One of the injuries that is injury No. 1 on X-ray examination was found to be grievous as there was a fracture. It appears that the prosecution allegation was that a spade (phawra) was used as an instrument for an offence and taking a spade as a sharp-edged weapon the conviction of the appellant was maintained under Section 326 IPC. {Para 2}

3. It could not be doubted that the injuries in the nature of lacerated wound or contusion could not be caused by an impact of a sharp-edged weapon on the human body. Such injuries are only possible by the use of a hard and blunt object. May be that the spade was the instrument of an offence but it might have been used in a manner in which the hard and blunt part of it came in contact with the body of the injured person. In view of the nature of injuries sustained on the complainant the conviction of the appellant under Section 326 IPC could not be sustained. At best he could be convicted for an offence under Section 325 IPC.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1978

Decided On: 23.01.1987

Ganga Prasad Vs. State of U.P.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

G.L. Oza and M.M. Dutt, JJ.

Citation: 1987 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 345,MANU/SC/1059/1987,1987 SCC 2 232.

Print Page