GRIEVOUS HURT AND ASSAULT

Facts: The informant of this case is daughter-in-law of Biglahi Devi, the deceased. On the basis of her fardbeyan, which was recorded on 04.07.2006 at about 18:00 hrs. at village Sadma Kathaltoli, Ormanjhi, a case has been lodged against Thakuwa Munda, Rajesh Munda, Rajendra Munda, Sawna Munda, Aghnu Munda and Barti Devi. In her fardbeyan the informant has stated that in the afternoon of 04.07.2006, at about 3:00 p.m., the accused persons forming an unlawful assembly, variously armed with iron rod, tangi, lathi and dabia, entered her house and started abusing her mother-in-law who was sitting in the courtyard. They were calling her daain and accusing her of practicing witchcraft on their son, daughter and daughter-in-law. They have assaulted her mother-in-law indiscriminately due to which she fell on the ground and died. On her raising hulla, several villagers had assembled there and the accused persons fled away. In the court, the informant has given a similar narration of the incident as has been recorded in her fardbeyan. She has named all the appellants as the persons who have assaulted her mother-in-law. She has stated that at the time when her mother-in-law was assaulted by the appellants no other family member was at home; her father-in-law was ploughing a nearby field.

Held: We find that the prosecution has established that he has played a role in the incident. The informant has stated that he has assaulted Biglahi Devi with road and the doctor has found several injuries around her chest and thigh. There are corresponding internal injuries found by the doctor-seven ribs were found fractured-but the prosecution has failed to establish that all the injuries were caused by Sawna Munda. In the opinion of the doctor, death has been caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries caused to Biglahi Devi and, not to forget, there is one more accused who has been found involved in the occurrence.
Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code defines grievous injury. Clause-Seventhly to section 320 provides that fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth would amount to grievous hurt. In the light of the above evidence, it is established that he intended to cause such grievous injury which was likely to cause death. In view of the above discussions, we hold that the appellant, namely, Sawna Munda has committed the offence under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and, accordingly, he is convicted and sentenced to RI for ten years under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

Facts: The Assistant Educational Officer, Cherpu is the de facto complainant in the case. The allegations against the accused in the case are that, while the de facto complainant had visited a school under her jurisdiction, having found that the Head Master of the school has not disbursed the lump sum grant payable to the students belonging to Scheduled Castes, she has issued directions to the Manager of the School to take appropriate action against the Head Master; that annoyed and infuriated by the said conduct of the de facto complainant, the accused who are the office bearers of an association of Head Masters went to the office of the de facto complainant and threatened and abused the de facto complainant, as a result of which, the accused fainted. The petitioners moved for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, the Sessions Court declined the relief to the petitioners. It was contended by the learned counsel that the allegations made against the accused should make out a case that the accused have either assaulted or used criminal force to the public servant in the execution of his/her duty as such public servant. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that lump sum grant payable to the students belonging to Scheduled Castes is now being disbursed directly to the bank account of the eligible students; that the Head Master of the school has no role in the matter and that the accused went to the office of the de facto complainant only to explain the said fact to her.

Held: The fact that the de facto complainant fainted in the course of the conversation the accused had with her is not seriously disputed. A perusal of the case diary reveals that the accused have abused and threatened their superior officer, the de facto complainant at her office by shouting at her. The explanation to Section 351 IPC clarifies that mere words do not amount to an assault, but the explanation also clarifies that the words which a person use may give to his gestures or preparation such a meaning as may make those gestures or preparations amount to an assault. Application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.