Production of an injury report for the offence under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing the ingredients of the offence

Listen to this article

Lakshman Singh v State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)

Criminal Appeal No. 606 of 2021, Decided on July 23, 2021

BENCH– Dr. DY Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, JJ.


In the present case, the accused persons belong to another village and they came at the site of incident where the victim was distributing the voters slip. The accused persons  asked him to stop giving slips and to handover the voters list. When denied by the victim, they assaulted him with fists, slaps and lathis as a consequence victim sustained injury. Subsequently the accused were tried and convicted under Section 323 and 147 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo six-month imprisonment. The contention raised by the accused was that since no injury report was issued by the hospital hence the accused cannot be convicted for the offence of Section 323 IPC. The contention was denied by the High Court, aggrieved by that the accused file the present appeal in Supreme Court.



Whether the production of injury report is sin qua non for convicting the accused under Section 323 IPC?



The Supreme Court answered the above question in negative and held that production of an injury report for the offence under Section 323 IPC is not a sine qua non for establishing the case for offence under Section 323. Court further held that it may be that there might not be any serious injuries/visible injuries as a result the hospital might not have issued the injury report. However, the Supreme Court observed that Section 323 IPC is a punishable section for voluntarily causing hurt. “Hurt” is defined under Section 319 IPC as whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person. Therefore, even causing bodily pain can be said to be causing “hurt”.  On the above grounds the court upheld the decision rendered by the High Court and convicted the accused under Section 323 and 147 of IPC.

Leave a Reply