Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Sanna Reddi and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 04, 1928
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/817749

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) Sections 34, 325, 326 - Several persons jointly inflicting injuries--Grievous hurt--Liability of all. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Sanna Reddi and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
113Ind.Cas.455a

Excerpt

penal code (act xlv of 1860) sections 34, 325, 326 - several persons jointly inflicting injuries--grievous hurt--liability of all. - ordercurgenven, j.1. on the finding that all the accused joined in inflicting the injuries upon p.w. no. 1, and that grievous hurt to him was caused in furtherance of the common intention of all, the learned sessions judge was right in applying section 34, indian penal code and finding all guilty under section 325, indian penal code. i do not think, however, that upon this footing the conviction of the 1st accused under section 326, indian penal code can be sustained, because the evidence shows that be caused only injury no. (1) which was not in itself grievous hurt was the result of the aggregate of 26 injuries, and it cannot be said, therefore, in the terms of section 326, indian penal code, that it was caused 'by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, etc.'2. accordingly i alter the conviction of 1st accused under section 326, indian penal code, into one under section 325, indian penal code. it is also pointed out that, when altering his conviction under section 324, indian penal code, to one under section 323, indian penal code, in respect of p. w. no. 5's injury the learned sessions judge did not reduce the sentence. in view of these two alterations i now reduce the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment imposed on 1st accused to one of nine months rigorous imprisonment. the comical revision petition is in other respects dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Curgenven, J.

1. On the finding that all the accused joined in inflicting the injuries upon P.W. No. 1, and that grievous hurt to him was caused in furtherance of the common intention of all, the learned Sessions Judge was right in applying Section 34, Indian Penal Code and finding all guilty under Section 325, Indian Penal Code. I do not think, however, that upon this footing the conviction of the 1st accused under Section 326, Indian Penal Code can be sustained, because the evidence shows that be caused only injury No. (1) which was not in itself grievous hurt was the result of the aggregate of 26 injuries, and it cannot be said, therefore, in the terms of Section 326, Indian Penal Code, that it was caused 'by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, etc.'

2. Accordingly I alter the conviction of 1st accused under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, into one under Section 325, Indian Penal Code. It is also pointed out that, when altering his conviction under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, to one under Section 323, Indian Penal Code, in respect of P. W. No. 5's injury the learned Sessions Judge did not reduce the sentence. In view of these two alterations I now reduce the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment imposed on 1st accused to one of nine months rigorous imprisonment. The comical revision petition is in other respects dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial