Common intention established under Section 34 IPC; Special Court's order directing compensation to victim and cancellation of bail confirmed
In a significant judgment delivered on August 18, 2026, the Kerala High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Majeed and another accused against their conviction and sentence imposed by the Special Court for the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act cases in Mannarkkad. The appellants were found guilty of multiple offences including house trespass, wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing grievous hurt, mischief, criminal intimidation, and attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), notably Sections 452, 341, 326, 427, 506(i), and 308 read with Section 34 IPC.
The case arose out of an incident on November 5, 2011, around 9 a.m., when the accused allegedly trespassed into the premises of the victim (PW6), following a dispute over a boundary rope tied on the property purchased from the second accused. The first accused, Majeed, reportedly assaulted the victim with a stick causing serious injuries, including fractures to the cheekbone and orbital region, while the second accused shared the common intention but did not directly inflict bodily injuries. The victim and eyewitnesses testified to the occurrence of the attack and subsequent threats made by the accused. Medical evidence corroborated the injuries sustained.
The Special Court convicted the accused, sentencing them to concurrent imprisonment terms ranging from one month to three years, along with fines. A compensation of Rs. 25,000 was ordered to be paid to the injured victim from the fine amount under Section 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing insufficient evidence and lack of specific overt acts by the second accused to warrant conviction under Section 34 IPC.
Upon detailed examination of witness testimonies, medical reports, and police investigation records, the Kerala High Court upheld the findings of the Special Court. The judgment reaffirmed the principle of vicarious liability under Section 34 IPC, stating that it is not necessary for each accused to perform overt acts; participation in furtherance of a common intention suffices for conviction. The Court emphasized that the prosecution had successfully established the accused’s common intention to commit the offences.
The Court also analyzed the essential ingredients of the charged offences, such as the intention and knowledge required for attempt to commit culpable homicide under Section 308 IPC, and the nature of house trespass with preparation for assault under Section 452 IPC. The evidence, including the victim’s injuries and the accused’s conduct, was found to meet these legal standards beyond reasonable doubt.
Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, the conviction and sentences were affirmed, and the interim bail granted to the appellants was cancelled. The accused were directed to surrender immediately to serve their sentences, and the Special Court was instructed to proceed with execution of the sentences without delay.
This judgment underscores the judiciary’s firm stance on crimes involving violence and intimidation, particularly where offences are committed in furtherance of a common criminal intention, ensuring justice for victims and adherence to the rule of law.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Sections 452, 341, 326, 427, 506(i), and 308 read with Section 34 of IPC upheld. Common intention under Section 34 IPC established by prosecution. No interference with conviction and sentence by the Special Court.
Statutory provision(s):
Sections 308, 452, 341, 326, 427, 506(i), 294(b), 354, 308 r/w 34, 357(1) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 34 and 357 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Majeed v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2968623
