The Supreme Court has held that the production of an injury report is not a mandatory requirement for establishing a case under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.
In this case, the accused were found guilty of committing offence under Sections 323 and 147 of the IPC and sentenced to six months in prison. During an election, the accused allegedly formed an illegal assembly “to snatch the voters list and cast bogus voting” and attacked some political workers.
One of the accused’s arguments was that no injury report was brought on record, and thus they could not be convicted of the offence under Section 323 IPC.
The bench, which included Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice MR Shah, observed that the evidence of injured witnesses is entitled to great weight and that very compelling and convincing grounds are required to dismiss their evidence. The court also noted that all of the witnesses were consistent in their statements and fully supported the prosecution’s case.
The court further observed that the production of an injury report for the Section 323 IPC offence is not a requirement for establishing the case for the Section 323 IPC offence. Section 323 of the IPC makes it a crime to intentionally cause harm. As a result, the courts below made no error in convicting the accused under Section 323 IPC based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The court also noted that the presence of all of the accused persons at the time of the incident, as well as their active participation, had been established and proven by the prosecution by examining witnesses who were both independent and injured witnesses.