Summary
In a fatal assault arising from a boundary dispute between relatives, the Supreme Court set aside both appellants' convictions under Section 294(b) IPC, since calling a person 'bastard' is not obscene. It set aside A-1's conviction under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC for want of shared common intention and kept his Section 324 conviction. It upheld A-2's conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC for a single blow with a log but cut his sentence from five to three years.
Issues
- Whether use of the word 'bastard' during a quarrel constitutes uttering obscene words under Section 294(b) IPC.
- Whether A-1, who struck PW-4 and not the deceased, shared a common intention with A-2 so as to be liable under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC.
- Whether A-2's conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC was justified and whether the sentence required reduction.
Provisions considered
- Section 294(b), Indian Penal Code, 1860Reading 'obscene' in the light of Section 292 IPC and Apoorva Arora, the Court held that obscenity concerns material appealing to prurient interest, and that vulgar or abusive words such as 'bastard', commonly used in heated exchanges, do not meet that test; the convictions were set aside. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19, 20)
- Section 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860A-1 attacked PW-4 with an aruval when PW-4 intervened; the words showing intent to kill were attributed only to A-2, there was no exhortation by A-1 and no reliable proof that A-1 beat the deceased afterwards, so common intention to cause death-likely injury was not safely established. (¶ 21)
- Section 299 and Section 304 Part II, Indian Penal Code, 1860The Court found no error in the High Court's view that A-2 committed culpable homicide with knowledge that his act was likely to cause death, given the skull fracture, brain clots and his words while lifting the log; it declined to consider Part I in the absence of an appeal by the State or victim and confirmed the Part II conviction. (¶¶ 23, 24, 26, 27)
- Section 324, Indian Penal Code, 1860A-1's conviction for causing hurt to PW-4 with an aruval was confirmed; his sentence (fine with default imprisonment) was reduced to the period already undergone. (¶¶ 21, 25)
Held
- Obscenity under Section 294 IPC denotes words or material that are lascivious or appeal to prurient interest; vulgarity and profanity are not by themselves obscene. Mere use of the word 'bastard', commonly used in heated conversation, does not attract Section 294(b) IPC. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20)
- Where the accused who first charged with an aruval struck only the intervening witness, did not exhort the co-accused, and the words showing an intent to kill were attributed only to the co-accused, it is not safe to hold that he shared the common intention to cause death-likely injury to the deceased; his conviction under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC cannot stand. (¶ 21)
- A-2's hard blow with a log on the deceased's head, causing a depressed skull fracture, accompanied by words showing he targeted the deceased, supported the finding that he acted with knowledge that death was likely, making out culpable homicide punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC. (¶¶ 23, 24)
- Without an appeal by the State or the victim, the Supreme Court refrained from examining whether the conviction should be altered to the graver offence under Section 304 Part I IPC. (¶ 24)
- On sentence, the age of the incident (2014), the altercation between close relatives over a boundary, the use of a log lying at the spot rather than a dangerous weapon, and a single blow in the heat of the moment justified reducing A-2's sentence from five to three years' rigorous imprisonment. (¶ 27)
Result
Appeals partly allowed. Convictions under Section 294(b) IPC set aside for both appellants; A-1's conviction under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 IPC set aside, his Section 324 conviction confirmed with sentence reduced to the period undergone, and he need not surrender. A-2's conviction under Section 304 Part II IPC confirmed with sentence reduced to three years' rigorous imprisonment; he must surrender to serve the remainder.