'Apprehension' Of Criminal Force Caused By Accused's Gestures Sufficient To Constitute Assault: Jharkhand HC Upholds Conviction U/S 353 IPC

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that the actual use of criminal force is not a condition precedent to attract the offence of assault defined under Section 351 of the IPC, which is punishable under Section 353 applicable. The Court held that the mere apprehension in the victim's mind about the potential use of criminal force, created by the accused's gestures, is sufficient to constitute the offence.The bench of Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary, presiding over the case, noted that Section 353 IPC deals with crimes arising from assault and the use of criminal force. It clarified, “Considering the basic ingredients of the definition of 'assault' under section 351 IPC this Court is of the considered view that if a person enters the office chamber of a public servant while the public servant is performing his official work and abuses and pressurizes the public servant to do a particular task in a particular manner to which the public servant is otherwise not agreeing or questions the public servant with regards to the manner he has discharged his official duty and thereby prevents the public servant to perform his official duty and escalates the situation to such an extent that the public servant is compelled to call the police to control the situation, the act comes within the meaning of assault as defined under section 351 IPC and consequently, offence under section 353 IPC is made out .”“Actual use of criminal force is not a condition precedent to attract section 351 and consequently attract section 353 of IPC. Apprehension in the mind of the victim about of use of criminal force created by gesture of the accused is sufficient. Such apprehension is reflected by the action, reaction and follow up action of the victim to tackle the situation and one such action is to call police to handle the situation when the public servant fails to persuade the accused person,” Justice Choudhary added.The case involved three individuals who entered the office of the informant, a public servant, and demanded the immediate issuance of a death certificate. One of the accused, D.N. Choubey, threatened the informant with dire consequences and began to abuse him. The other two accused were identified as Banamali Singh Choudhary, former Pramukh of Chas Block, and Ramlal Singh.A case was registered against the accused under Sections 353, 448, 504/34 of the IPC. The trial court convicted them under Sections 353 and 504/34 IPC but acquitted them of Section 448 IPC charges. The appellate court upheld the conviction, prompting the revision application now before the High Court.The counsel for the Petitioner argued that there was no eyewitness to the incident, and the trial court had relied on the testimony of P.W.-4. It was further argued that no criminal force was used, and there were no allegations against the accused of preventing the informant from performing his official duties.In response, the counsel for the State asserted that the informant, an executive magistrate, was carrying out his duties in his office when the accused entered and committed the crime. The State's counsel emphasized that to invoke Section 353 of the IPC, the presence of criminal force or assault must be proven, and in this case, the essential elements were clearly established.The Court clarified the definition of assault under Section 351 of the IPC, stating, “Whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault under section 351 IPC.”The Court further explained that a gesture made with the knowledge that it would cause apprehension of criminal force constitutes assault. Section 353 IPC encompasses both the use of criminal force and assault. The Court added that while mere words do not amount to assault, they may, when coupled with gestures or preparations, give rise to an assault.The Court concluded, “There is no merit in this revision petition calling for any interference in the conviction and sentence of the petitioner and accordingly this revision petition is dismissed.”Case Title: Devendra Nath Choubey V. The State of JharkhandLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 178Click Here To Read Judgement

'Apprehension' Of Criminal Force Caused By Accused's Gestures Sufficient To Constitute Assault: Jharkhand HC Upholds Conviction U/S 353 IPC

Bhavya Singh

Tags