668+ Lawyers are online 
Can the accused under section 354 get relief as he is 55% paralysed
06-Jul-2023 (In Criminal Law)
The police have applied sections 354(A),323 and sections relating to trespassing and common intention.With the case being that accused lady #1 tore the clothes of the victim #1 and accused #2 & #3 assaulted the victims #2 & #3 with fists & kicks.However the accused #3 suffers from 55% paralysis and require assistance in common activities like climbing stairs etc. Witnesses claim to have seen nothing as per statement. My questions are in 3 areas: A) Can accused #1 get benefit as the section 354(a) is concerning a man and not a woman. B) Can accused # 3 get relief as he is 55% paralysed and has relevant medical certificates. C) What happens of accused #2,would be be discharged as the rest of accused if they get relief relating to the above questions? Please suggest.
First thing is what do you expect from the word 'relief' - Bail or acquittal or discharge? This is because all these are decided based upon different criteria. For grant of bail only a prima facie case has to be established whereas for discharge it has to be shown that there lacks cogent evidences to proceed with the trial whereas for acquittal it will be decided upon the evidences in the form of deposition of witnesses.
So be as it is.
Answers to your questions, here is my response:
A. Yes in the said circumstances, Sec 354(A) would not be used against acd No. 1 who is a lady and as all other sections are bailable there should not be any difficulty to acd No. 1 for being granted bail. Similarly, during trial as well this particular section would not be pressed against acd No. 1.
2.Yes, acd No. 2 will get benefit only if his medical documents support the claim of he being 55% paralysed. This will negate the allegations that he assaulted the victim when, as a matter of fact, he himself needs help of others in doing routine works.
C. No, acd No. 3 cannot be discharged simply because acd No. 1 and 2 could get the relief. This is because the court examines the roles attributed to each accused while deciding the application of bail or discharge. Here the role attributed to acd No. 3 is that he along with acd No. 2 assaulted the victim. Acd No. 3 was discharged because it was improbable that he could assault due to his medical condition. For getting discharge for acd No. 2, you cannot simply rely upon the discharge of other two accused persons but in addition to these discharge orders, will have to bring to the notice of the court the commission and omissions in the testimonies of witnesses and the contradictions therein. You will have to argue that as two other accused have already been discharged and the falsity of allegations have been proved to some extent, the mallicious intent of the complainant in lodging the FIR based on hypothetical instances has come to the fore and therefore acd no. 2 is also liable to be discharged from the case.
Hope I answer your query.
So be as it is.
Answers to your questions, here is my response:
A. Yes in the said circumstances, Sec 354(A) would not be used against acd No. 1 who is a lady and as all other sections are bailable there should not be any difficulty to acd No. 1 for being granted bail. Similarly, during trial as well this particular section would not be pressed against acd No. 1.
2.Yes, acd No. 2 will get benefit only if his medical documents support the claim of he being 55% paralysed. This will negate the allegations that he assaulted the victim when, as a matter of fact, he himself needs help of others in doing routine works.
C. No, acd No. 3 cannot be discharged simply because acd No. 1 and 2 could get the relief. This is because the court examines the roles attributed to each accused while deciding the application of bail or discharge. Here the role attributed to acd No. 3 is that he along with acd No. 2 assaulted the victim. Acd No. 3 was discharged because it was improbable that he could assault due to his medical condition. For getting discharge for acd No. 2, you cannot simply rely upon the discharge of other two accused persons but in addition to these discharge orders, will have to bring to the notice of the court the commission and omissions in the testimonies of witnesses and the contradictions therein. You will have to argue that as two other accused have already been discharged and the falsity of allegations have been proved to some extent, the mallicious intent of the complainant in lodging the FIR based on hypothetical instances has come to the fore and therefore acd no. 2 is also liable to be discharged from the case.
Hope I answer your query.
Helpful?
21+
21+
Adv. Mohd Atik Iqbal
Akola | 500+ Answers
Chat
Disclaimer: The above query and its response is NOT a legal opinion in any way whatsoever as this is based on the information shared by the person posting the query at lawrato.com and has been responded by one of the Divorce Lawyers at lawrato.com to address the specific facts and details.
Connect with top Criminal lawyers for your specific legal issue
No Comments! Be the first one to comment.
"lawrato.com has handpicked some of the best Legal Experts in the country to help you get practical Legal Advice & help."
