death caused by single injury
vinod bansal
(Querist) 22 March 2009
This query is : Resolved
Respected all
A single injury was caused with BRICK & injured died for which eleven persons are facing murder charge,in prosecution evidence it is not proved that by whom injury was caused,every witness is silent regarding this aspect that out of eleven by whom this injury was caused,witnesses simply stated that some persons started throwing bricks from the roof of their house at night resultly one person died by head injury caused with brick.I m representing accused plz avail me some citation.Thanks
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 22 March 2009
Sir, Section 32 IPC held them all to be liable.
if possible pls give some more details abt the evidence so that some connecting judgments can be found.
B.B.R.Goud.
(Expert) 22 March 2009
yes, i do agree with Mr kiran Kumar.
this offence attracts the Sec 32, IPC, as the group of people conspirated and murdered, making all of them liable.
RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE
(Expert) 23 March 2009
My Ld. friend suggested absdolutely right.I also do agree with all of them.
Prashant Kumar Jha
(Expert) 23 March 2009
i m agree with my ld friends they are absolutely right, till u can't provide more about evd we can' suggest about citation
KANDE VENKATESH GUPTA
(Expert) 23 March 2009
Your clients can have the valid defence. According to your version, None of the witnesses named the persons who pelted the bricks against the deceased or for that matter who conspired and premeditated to kill the deceased. Unless the prosecution establishes the fact that the accused have premidated to kill the deceased and they have prior meeting of minds and in that common intention, one of the conspirator or member of such unlawful assembly caused injury. Unless the common intention or pior meeting of minds of the accsued is established by the prosecution either by direct evidence or by indirect evidence i.e., cirmstantial evidence, in the absence of specific evidence evidence as to who caused the injury, all the accused are entitled for acquittal. I hope there is a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that aspect. I will try to get it.
K.C.Suresh
(Expert) 24 March 2009
Dear friends you may read Section 34 IPC. S.32 of IPC is not applicable.
Section. 34 IPC: Acts done by several persons infurtherence of common intention._
Whwn a criminal act is doen br several persons in furtherence of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
You may go through AIR 1999 SC 1083, 1999 (8)SCC 555, 1999 (1) CCR 152 (Kant)
B.B.R.Goud.
(Expert) 29 March 2009
thank you Mr Suresh.
Ss.32 & 33 of IPC is giving some definitions and their scope, as specified hereunder:
32. Words referring to acts include illegal omissions:- In every part of this Code, except where a contrary intention appears from the context, words which refer to acts done extend also to illegal omissions.
33. "Act", "Omission":- The word "act": denotes as well a series of acts as a single act; the word "Omission" denotes as well a series of omissions as a single omission.
34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention:- When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.
35. When such an act is criminal by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge or intention:- Whenever an act, which is criminal only by reason of its being done with a criminal knowledge or intention, is done by several persons, each of such persons who joins in the act with such knowledge or intention is liable for the act in the same manner as if the act were done by him alone with that knowledge or intention.
