Penal Code, 1860 – Section 324 – Dangerous Weapon – Motorbike – An object, such as a motorbike, can be considered a dangerous weapon under Section 324 IPC if used with intent to cause hurt and has the potential to cause death.
2025 KER 45444 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2267
High Court of Kerala
Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Criminal Revision Petition No. 162 of 2013; 24th June 2025
Facts: The petitioner, Manoj, was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for intentionally hitting the second respondent with his motorbike on 11/06/2005, causing minor injuries. The incident stemmed from enmity due to the petitioner’s relationship with the second respondent’s daughter. The trial court sentenced him to six months’ simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000, which was upheld by the appellate court. The petitioner challenged the conviction and sentence, arguing that a motorbike is not a dangerous weapon under Section 324 IPC and that the sentence was excessive.
Issues:
-
Whether a motorbike, when used to cause hurt, qualifies as a dangerous weapon under Section 324 IPC.
-
Whether the conviction under Section 324 IPC was sustainable based on the evidence.
-
Whether the sentence imposed was proportionate to the offence.
Held:
-
The Court held that a motorbike, though not inherently a weapon, qualifies as a dangerous weapon under Section 324 IPC when used with intent to cause hurt, as it has the potential to cause death or serious injury. The broader interpretation of “instrument” under Section 324 includes any object used as a weapon of offence.
-
The conviction was upheld, as the prosecution proved the intentional act beyond reasonable doubt through consistent evidence of the injured (PW1), occurrence witnesses (PWs 2 and 3), and medical evidence (Exts. P3 and P4). The defence’s claim of an accidental collision was rejected due to evidence of motive and intent.
-
Considering the minor nature of the injury, the lapse of 20 years since the incident, and the petitioner’s prolonged legal ordeal, the substantive sentence was reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court. However, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation to the second respondent under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C., with a default sentence of three months’ simple imprisonment.
Ratio Decidendi: An object, such as a motorbike, can be considered a dangerous weapon under Section 324 IPC if used with intent to cause hurt and has the potential to cause death. The Court emphasized a contextual interpretation of “instrument” based on its use in the offence.
Obiter Dicta: The Court noted the personal context of the case, including the petitioner’s relationship with the second respondent’s daughter and the peaceful resolution of her life post-incident, as factors influencing the reduction of the sentence.
Disposition: Criminal Revision Petition allowed in part. Conviction under Section 324 IPC confirmed; sentence modified to imprisonment till rising of the court and compensation of Rs. 50,000 to the second respondent.
For Appellant : Advs. B. Mohanlal & Preeta P.S.
For Respondents : Advs. S. Rajeev & E. C. Bineesh (Sr. Government Pleader)
