33 Years On Rajasthan High Court Acquits Man Of Attempt To Murder; Says Grievous Injuries, Dangerous Weapon Insufficient Without Intention

While setting aside a 1993 order convicting a man for attempt to murder, Rajasthan High Court held that the fact of grievous or repeated injuries using a dangerous weapon, would not by itself attract such conviction without the ingredient of intention or knowledge to commit the offence. 

The bench of Justice Farjand Ali opined that the courts had to carefully segregate whether the assault was the result of a deliberate homicidal design, or a sudden quarrel, temporary provocation, emotional instability or loss of self-control.

"It is well settled that the nature of weapon used, the part of body chosen for assault, the severity of injuries inflicted, antecedent animosity, motive, surrounding circumstances and the conduct of the accused before and after the occurrence are all relevant considerations in determining the existence of the requisite intention. However, the mere fact that grievous injuries were caused or that a dangerous weapon was used would not, ipso facto, attract Section 307 IPC unless the prosecution further succeeds in establishing the indispensable ingredient of intention or knowledge to commit murder.
The distinction between an offence under Section 307 IPC and offences relating to voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt is often subtle yet legally profound. While grievous or repeated injuries may constitute an aggravating circumstance, the same cannot substitute the indispensable mental element required for constituting an offence of attempt to murder. Courts are therefore required to carefully discern whether the assault was actuated by a deliberate homicidal design or whether it emerged out of a sudden quarrel, temporary provocation, emotional instability or loss of self-control"

The Court considered that just before the alleged incident, the victim and the appellant were sitting together and having tea. It was concluded that there was no pre-meditated or preconceived design on part of the appellant to murder the victim.

For context, the Court was hearing an appeal, pending since 1993, against appellant's conviction for attempt to murder. It was alleged that the appellant assaulted the victim with a sword.

After hearing the contentions, the Court highlighted that immediately prior to the incident, the parties were sitting together, and consuming tea, in a cordial atmosphere. It was only after certain heated words were exchanged between the parties, that the appellant allegedly brought a sharp-edged weapon, and assaulted the victim.

The Court further stated that there existed some prior discord between the parties, but that was amicably resolved around 3 years back.

The Court also considered the testimony of the concerned doctor as per which none of the injuries were opined to be sufficient to cause death or immediately dangerous to life.

In this background, the Court held that the offence of attempt to murder was not founded upon the consequence of the act, but primarily the intention and mens rea accompanying the actus reus.

The Court took into account the happenings on the day of the incident as well as the medical opinion, and held that the incident was the result of sudden provocation and momentary loss of self-restraint rather than a calculated homicidal attempt.

Accordingly, the conviction of the appellant was changed from that of attempt to murder to voluntarily causing hurt.

Considering protracted litigation, advanced age of the appellant, and limited financial means, his sentence was reduced to the period already undergone.

Title: Puran Singh v State of Rajasthan, and other connected petition

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj)

Click Here To Read/Download Order