Biting the victim's thumb is not an offence under section 324 IPC
Orissa High Court Modifies Conviction in Thumb-Biting Case. Conviction altered from Section 324 to Section 323 IPC; appellant sentenced to time already served
In a significant legal development, the Orissa High Court has modified the conviction of Satyajit Rout, initially sentenced under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for biting the victim's thumb, to Section 323 IPC, which deals with voluntarily causing hurt. The judgment was delivered by Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, who presided over the Criminal Appeal No. 377 of 2004, stemming from a 2004 decision by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rourkela.
The original conviction was based on charges that Rout had assaulted the informant, leading to a thumb injury. However, the appellate court found that the act of biting did not meet the criteria for "use of a weapon or dangerous means" as required under Section 324 IPC. Instead, it constituted a simple offence of voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323 IPC.
The case dates back to an incident on September 12, 2002, when Rout was accused of assaulting the informant following a series of indecent remarks directed towards the informant's wife. During the altercation, Rout allegedly bit the informant's thumb. The prosecution had initially charged Rout under Sections 324, 506, and 509 IPC, along with provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which were subsequently dismissed due to lack of evidence.
Justice Mishra, in his judgment, underscored that the act of biting did not involve any weapon or inherently dangerous means. Consequently, the High Court set aside the conviction under Section 324 IPC but upheld the conviction under Section 323 IPC.
Furthermore, considering the appellant's prior nine-day custody and the time elapsed since the incident, the court opted to sentence Rout to the period already served. The court also affirmed a fine of Rs. 1,000, payable to the victim as per Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a provision for simple imprisonment of one week in case of default.
The judgment highlights the judicial scrutiny applied in differentiating between the degrees of criminal acts and emphasizes the importance of aligning charges with the specific circumstances of the case.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Section 324 IPC for an act of biting the victim's thumb is not sustainable as it does not involve the use of a weapon or inherently dangerous means. The act constitutes an offence under Section 323 IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 324, 323; Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Section 4; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 360, 357
Satyajit Rout v. State of Orissa, (Orissa) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2777094
