Delhi HC rejects plea of convict challenging 5-year jail term

Accused was charged with attempt to murder wife and mother-in-law with axe in inebriated state

The Delhi High Court has rejected the appeal filed by a man challenging the five-year jail term awarded to him for attempting to murder his wife and mother-in-law by hitting them with an axe after he returned home intoxicated.

“In the present case, the appellant [man] has used the axe with which he inflicted injury on the victim [wife] on the vital part of the body i.e. the face. Considering the weapon of offence and the vital part of the body where the injury is inflicted, the intention of the appellant to commit murder is evident,” Justice Mukta Gupta said.

A local court in March 2020 had convicted Gain Chand for offence punishable under Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code and directed him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years.

As per the case of prosecution, Chand was living with his wife and mother-in-law at their house when an altercation took place. It is alleged that he came back intoxicated, went to the kitchen, took the axe and hit the mother-in-law and wife resulting in grievous injury to the mother-in-law and simple injury to the wife.

Contradictory testimony

Chand had argued that there are material contradictions in the testimony of the two injured victims. He contended that in spite of the prosecution’s claim that there were several eyewitnesses, none were examined.

He sought to be acquitted of the charge for offence punishable under Section 307 IPC or in the alternative be released on the period already undergone.

The judge, however, refused to accept the plea saying, “Considering the nature of weapon used, that the injuries were inflicted on vital part of the body and the evidence of the two injured victims, this court finds that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant has committed the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC”.

“Hence no case is made out for interference with the impugned judgment of conviction,” the judge added.

Justice Gupta took note of the nature of injuries caused and refused Chand’s plea to release him on the period already undergone.