The court maintains Ashish Kumar's conviction for robbery but dismisses the State's appeal for an attempted murder conviction.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, has upheld the acquittal of Ashish Kumar for the charge of attempted murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), while affirming his conviction for robbery under Sections 392 and 394 of the IPC. The decision was delivered on July 17, 2026, following an appeal by the State Government of NCT of Delhi against a lower court's judgment dated January 10, 2020.
The case arose from an incident on September 14, 2018, when the victim, Aman, a student at Hansraj College, was returning home by train. It was alleged that Ashish Kumar attempted to snatch Aman's mobile phone from a moving train, pushing him in the process, which resulted in Aman falling onto the railway tracks and losing his leg. The prosecution argued that Kumar's actions demonstrated intent and knowledge that could have caused death, thus warranting a conviction under Section 307 IPC for attempted murder.
However, the High Court found that the essential elements of intent or knowledge to cause death, crucial for a conviction under Section 307, were not sufficiently established. The court emphasized that the push was intended to facilitate the robbery, not to cause fatal harm. This interpretation aligns with precedents set by the Supreme Court in cases such as "Hari Singh versus Sukhbir Singh" and "Sarju Prasad versus State of Bihar," where intent and knowledge are pivotal to convictions under Section 307.
The court noted that the robbery was the primary intent, supported by testimonies and evidence presented during the trial. Consequently, Kumar's actions were punishable under Sections 392 and 394 IPC for robbery and causing injury during robbery, but not under Section 307 IPC. The court also highlighted that while the injury resulted in severe harm, it did not meet the threshold for attempted murder without the requisite mens rea.
The Delhi High Court's judgment underscores the importance of proving intent and knowledge in cases of attempted murder, reiterating that severe injury alone does not suffice for such a conviction. The ruling dismisses the appeal by the State, affirming the lower court's judgment and sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment for robbery, along with fines.
Bottom line:-
For conviction under Section 307 IPC, it is essential to prove that the accused acted with requisite intent or knowledge to cause injury likely to result in death. Mere grievous injury during the commission of robbery does not suffice to attract Section 307 IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Section 307 IPC, Section 392 IPC, Section 394 IPC, Section 377(3) of CrPC.
State Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Ashish Kumar, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2942488
