Supreme Court sets aside HC orders to remove Section 307

0
20
AmritsarPosted at: Jun 3, 2017, 1:03 AM; last updated: Jun 3, 2017, 1:03 AM (IST)MURDEROUS ATTACK ON ADVOCATE

Tribune News Service

 

Amritsar, June 2

The apex court has quashed and set aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court orders in which it had removed the charge framed under Section 307, IPC, (attempt to murder) in a case pertaining to murderous attack on advocate Vaneet Mahajan and his brother Avinash Mahajan. While orders were passed in April, but its copy was issued recently and circulated today.
Mahajan and his brother were brutally attacked on May 10, 2014, when they were returning home. Following their statement the Civil Lines police had booked the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) councillor, Prabhjit Rataul, and his accomplices. They are out on bail. Mahajan had blamed the then Punjab Cabinet Minister, Anil Joshi, for perpetrating the crime.
The session court had framed charges under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 4327, 148, 149, 120-B and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), against the suspects. However, the suspects filed a revision petition in the High Court, which partly allowed the petition and deleted the charge framed under Section 307, IPC, while terming it as unsustainable.
While passing orders the High Court pointed out that the medical evidence available on record does not support the charge under Section 307 and at the most charge could be filed only under Section 326, IPC. It added that the “intention to kill” on part of the suspects was conspicuously missing.
Following this Mahajan filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court while pleading that the sessions court had rightly framed the attempt to murder charge (Section 307 of the IPC).
After going through the records and hearing arguments of both the parties, the double Bench of the Supreme Court viewed that the approach (of deleting 307, IPC) of the High Court was ‘clearly unsustainable’. Quoting a previous judgement the judges said that in order to attract the provisions of Section 307, IPC, the injury need not be on fatal part of the body.
“Several persons attacked unarmed persons with deadly weapons. It is reasonable to presume that they had the intention that such attack would result in death,” Apex court pointed out while adding that the accused persons should also be tried for offence under Section 307 of the IPC.

All readers are invited to post comments responsibly. Any messages with foul language or inciting hatred will be deleted. Comments with all capital letters will also be deleted. Readers are encouraged to flag the comments they feel are inappropriate.
The views expressed in the Comments section are of the individuals writing the post. The Tribune does not endorse or support the views in these posts in any manner.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here