SECTION 323 IPC - Indian Penal Code - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt



IPC Section-323

Description of IPC Section 323

According to section 323 of Indian penal code, Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

 

Offence : Voluntarily causing hurt


Punishment : 1 Year or Fine or Both


Cognizance : Non-Cognizable


Bail : Bailable


Triable : Any Magistrate





Section 323 IPC- Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt

Hurt usually relates to non-fatal offences which do not result in the death of any person. There are numerous ways in which a person may commit non-fatal offences against the society or an individual for example by causing bodily injury, destruction to property or infecting someone with a deadly disease. The loss incurred is sometimes reparable but most of the times irreparable. Thus, it is important to be aware of the offenses under Section 323, i.e. voluntarily causing hurt to someone and the punishment prescribed for it under the Indian Penal Code.


 

What is meant by Hurt and Voluntarily Causing Hurt?

According to section 319 of the Indian Penal code, when any person is involved in an act of causing bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any other person, such person is said to have caused hurt. In other words, hurting refers to an act of causing physical pain, injury or any disease to a person. It may be caused voluntarily or involuntarily. Hurt caused involuntarily does not attract any criminal charges as the person causing such hurt must not have the intention to cause the same. However, voluntarily causing hurt to a person shall have penal consequences under the Indian Penal Code and may require the help of a criminal lawyer to prosecute a person committing such an offence. The Indian Penal Code under section 321 defines voluntarily causing hurt as an act committed by a person with the knowledge that such an act may cause damage to the other person.
 

When is a Person said to have Caused Hurt Voluntarily?

Under section 323 of Indian Penal Code, when any person, except in the cases provided under section 334 (voluntarily causing hurt on provocation), commits an act with the knowledge that the commission of the same may cause damage to the other person, the person committing the act will be held liable for voluntarily causing hurt. Let us understand this with the help of an example.
 
In a case, an accused in the heat of an argument with his wife hit her on the head with an iron rod weighing around 200 grams, as a result of which she died. The medical evidence held it to be a simple injury that could not have possibly caused the death of the victim. Thus, in this case, the accused was only held liable for voluntarily causing hurt to the victim on the grounds that the accused did not have the intention to kill the victim but only to cause bodily injury.
 
Similarly, in a case where the accused pushed the chest of a person as a result of which the person fell down on a stone and died, the court held that the accused did not have the intention to cause death of the person and thus only held him liable under section 323 of IPC for causing hurt voluntarily.
 
Thus, the two essential ingredients of section 321 of IPC is, ‘intention’ to cause hurt and the ‘knowledge’ that the act is likely to cause hurt. If in any act of voluntarily causing hurt, intention and knowledge are not present on the part of the person committing the act, he cannot be charged for causing hurt voluntarily under the Indian Penal Code.
 

What Constitutes Hurt under IPC?

According to the Indian Penal Code, whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person is said to cause hurt. To constitute hurt (battery under English Law) any of the following essentials needs to be caused:-

  1. Bodily pain, or

  2. Disease, or

  3. Infirmity or Disorder

The above-mentioned essentials of Hurt under IPC has been elaborated below for a better understanding:

1. Bodily Pain
According to Section 319 of the Indian Penal Code, whoever causes bodily ache, disorder or disease to any individual is said to cause hurt. The expression ‘physical pain’ means that the pain must be physical instead of any mental pain. So mentally or emotionally hurting anyone will no longer be ‘harm’ inside the meaning of Section 319. However, to be covered under this section, it isn’t always important that any visible injury should be precipitated at the sufferer. All that the section contemplates is the inflicting of bodily pain. The diploma or severity of the ache or pain isn’t a fabric element to decide whether Section 319 will apply or not. The duration of ache or pain is immaterial. Pulling a girl with her hair would amount to hurt.
 
In the State vs Ramesh Dass on 22 May 2015 in a hospital, passing through the corridor, in the new surgical block location, an unknown public individual came from the front and attacked the woman. That individual pulled her hair and threw her to the ground. He hit her on her head together with his hand. Accused was convicted for the offences under Section 341 and 323 of the IPC and acquitted for the offence under Section 354 of the IPC.
 
2. Disease
A communication of ailment or disease from one individual to another through the way of touch would constitute hurt. But, the idea is unclear with respect to the transmission of sexual sicknesses from one individual to every other. For instance, a prostitute who had intercourse with a person and thereby communicated syphilis changed into held in charge under Section 269 of the IPC for spreading infection and not for inflicting hurt due to the fact that the interval between the act and sickness turned into too far away to attract Section 319 of the IPC.
 
In Raka vs. Emperor, the accused was a prostitute and she inflicted syphilis to her customers. It was held that accused, the prostitute was liable under Section 269 of IPC- negligent act likely to spread infection of any disease dangerous to the life of another person.
 
3. Infirmity/ Temporary or Permanent Disorder
Infirmity denotes the bad state of frame of mind and a state of transient intellectual impairment or hysteria or terror would constitute disease inside the meaning of this expression inside the section. It is an incapability of an organ to carry out its everyday function, whether temporarily or completely. It may be delivered through the administration of a toxic or poisonous substance or by means of taking alcohol administered by way of any other person.
 
Jashanmal Jhamatmal vs Brahmanand Swarupanand [AIR 1944 Sind 19]: In this case, the respondent has been evicted with the aid of the owner. He attempts to get revenge via vacating others from that constructing too. Respondent later confronted with A’s spouse with a pistol in his hand.
 
Hurt resulting in Death: Where there is no intention to cause death, or no knowledge that death is likely to be caused, and death is caused, the accused will be guilty of ‘hurt’ only if the injuries are not serious in nature.
 

What is Grievous Hurt and What is the Difference between Hurt and Grievous Hurt?

The code on the basis of the gravity of the physical assault has classified hurt into simple and grievous so that the accused might be awarded punishment commensurate to his guilt.
 
The following kinds of hurt only are designated as “grievous”:

  • Emasculation.

  • Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.

  • Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.

  • Privation of any member or joint.

  • Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.

  • Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.

  • Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.

  • Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

 
Section 320 designates eight kinds of hurt as grievous and provides enhanced punishment in such cases. Thus, to make out the offense of causing grievous hurt, there must be some specific hurt, voluntarily inflicted, and should come within any of the eight kinds enumerated in this section. These have been further explained below for a better understanding:
 
1. Emasculation
This clause is confined to males only. It means depriving a male of masculine vigour, i.e. to render a man impotent.  This clause was inserted to counteract the practice common in this country for women to squeeze men’s testicles on the slightest provocation.
 
2. Injury to Eyesight
The test of gravity is the permanency of the injury caused to one eye or both eyes.
 
3. Deprivation of Hearing
It may be with respect to one ear or both ears. To attract this clause the deafness caused must be permanent.
 
4. Loss of Limb or Joint
The expression used in is section is deprivation of any member, section or join, crippling a man with life-long misery. The term member is used to mean nothing more than an organ or a limb.
 
5. Impairing of Limb
Disabling is distinguishable from disfiguring as discussed in the sixth clause. To disfigure means to cause some external injury which detracts from a person’s personal appearance. It may not weaken him. On the other hand, to disable means to do something creating a permanent disability and not a mere temporary injury.
 
6. Permanent disfiguring of Head or Face
In Gangaram v. State of Rajasthan, where the bridge of the nose was cut, as the injury was inflicted by a sharp-edged weapon, it was held that the act amounted to permanent disfiguration within the meaning of this clause and hence the injury was grievous.
 
7. Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth
A fracture, in order to attract this clause, must extend to the inner surface. If the act results only in abrasion and does not break the bone, it will not be a fracture.
 
8. Any hurt which risks life or which causes the victim to be during the time of days in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits 
The hurt which causes severe bodily pain for the period of twenty days means that a person must be unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

To summarise, the distinction between simple hurt and grievous hurt has been stated below:

  • According to Section 319 of the Code, whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person is said to cause hurt. As per Section 320 of the code, grievous hurt is caused through specific nature of injuries, such as emasculation, loss of sight, loss of hearing, loss of limb or joint, loss of use of any limb or joint, disfiguration of the head or face, fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth and dangerous to life etc.

  • Simple hurt does not endanger life while grievous hurt may cause danger to life.

  • Simple hurt is not serious while grievous hurt is serious in its nature.

  • Hurt is punishable when it is accompanied with other offences, such as voluntarily causing hurt etc., whereas grievous hurt itself is a punishable offence.

  • Simple hurt is little more than frolic which a good natured man would hardly resent but the grievous hurt is that offence which approaches in enormity to murder.

  • Simple hurt gives bodily pain for short period but grievous hurt is a hurt which causes to be in pain, disease or unable to pursue his ordinary avocations, during the space of twenty days.

  • The punishment for voluntarily causing hurt prescribed by Section 323 is one year imprisonment or with fine of Rs. 1000/- or both whereas the punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt prescribed in Section 325 is the imprisonment which may be extended to seven years and also fine.
     

When Hurt is Caused Voluntarily using Dangerous Weapons or Means

Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
 
Punishment: Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
 

Voluntarily Causing Hurt using Acid

As per Section 326A of Indian Penal Code,” Whoever makes changeless or halfway harm or distortion, or consumes or mutilates or distorts or cripples, any part or parts of the body of an individual or causes offensive hurt by tossing corrosive on or by regulating corrosive to that individual, or by utilizing some other methods with the expectation of causing or with the information that he is probably going to cause such hurt, will be rebuffed with detainment/imprisonment of either portrayal for a term which will not be under ten years however which may stretch out to detainment forever (life imprisonment), and with fine.
 
“According to Section 326B of Indian Penal Code,” Whoever tosses or endeavors to toss corrosive on any individual or endeavors to control corrosive to any individual, or endeavors to utilize some other methods, with the aim of causing lasting or fractional harm or deformation or distortion or inability or grievous hurt to that individual, will be rebuffed with detainment of either depiction for a term which will not be under five years yet which may reach out to seven years, and will likewise be subject to fine.” Section 357B of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 sets down, ” The remuneration payable by the State Government under Section 357A will be notwithstanding the payment of fine to the unfortunate casualty under Section 326A or Section 376D of IPC. Section 357C of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 sets out, “All emergency clinics, public or private, regardless of whether run by the Central Government, nearby bodies or some other individual, will quickly give the emergency treatment or therapeutic treatment, free of cost, to the casualties of any offense secured under Section 326A, 376, 376A, 376C, 376D or 376E of IPC and will promptly educate the police about such an incident.
 
Recently included seventh provision of Section 100 of the IPC sets out that the privilege of private barrier of body stretches out to deliberately causing death or of some other damage to the attacker in the event of a demonstration of tossing or managing corrosive or an endeavour to toss or regulate corrosive which may sensibly cause the dread that terrible hurt will generally be the result of such act. For the first time remuneration was given to corrosive unfortunate casualty on account of Laxmi v UOI. In Morepally Venkatasree Nagesh v State of AP, the accused was suspicious about the character for his significant other and emptied mercuric chloride into her vagina, she later kicked the bucket because of renal disappointment. The accused was charged under Section 302 and 307 of the IPC. In the State of Karnataka by Jalahalli Police Station v Joseph Rodrigues, one of the most popular cases including corrosive assault. The accused tossed corrosive on a young lady named Hasina for declining his employment bid. Because of the corrosive assault, the shading and presence of her face changed which left her visually impaired. The accused was convicted under Section 307 for IPC and condemned to detainment forever (life imprisonment). Remuneration of Rs 2,00,000 notwithstanding Trial Court fine of Rs 3,00,000 was to be paid by the accused to the guardians for the victim.  The above-mentioned cases are obvious of the brutal repercussions looked by the unfortunate casualties because of the corrosive assaults. The administration is still in the quest for stringent measures.
 

When Hurt is Caused Voluntarily due to Sudden Provocation

As stated above, voluntarily causing hurt is a punishable crime under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. However, if hurt is voluntarily caused due to grave and sudden provocation as provided for under section 334 of the Indian Penal Code, the offender will be legally responsible under section 334 and not under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and will be liable to be punished with imprisonment of one month along with fine of Rs. 500.
 

What is the Punishment under Section 323?

When a person commits an offence of voluntarily causing hurt as mentioned under section 321 of IPC, he will be liable to be punished for a term up to 1 year and fine which may extend up to Rs. 1000.  The extent of punishment under this section will depend upon the seriousness of the offence.
 

What is the Nature of the Offence under Section 323?

The offence of voluntarily causing hurt is a non-cognizable offence, meaning thereby if a person has committed an offence under this section the police cannot arrest such a person without a warrant. An offence under this section is bailable in nature and is liable to be investigated and decided by the Magistrate who is having authority over the area where such offence has been committed.
 

Role of Intention or Knowledge under Section 323

Intention or knowledge is an important aspect of causing hurt to an individual. A person who intentionally sets out to purpose shock to somebody with a weak coronary heart and succeeds in doing so, he is said to have caused hurt. Any bodily ache due to management of capsules can be protected under ‘harm’. Whilst the harm isn’t always severe and there is no purpose to cause death, or grievous hurt, the accused could be guilty of inflicting harm most effective, despite the fact that death is caused.
 
In Marana Goundan v. R [AIR 1941 Mad. 560] the accused demanded money from the deceased which the latter owed him. The deceased promised to pay later. Thereafter the accused kicked him at the abdomen and the deceased collapsed and died. The accused changed into held guilty of causing hurt as it couldn’t be stated that he meant or knew that kicking at the abdomen become in all likelihood to hazard existence.
 
Section 321 of the IPC defines voluntarily causing harm as whoever does any act with the intention of thereby causing harm to any person, or with the expertise that he’s likely thereby to reason hurt to any individual, and does thereby motive harm to any person, is stated: “voluntarily to motive hurt”. What constitutes a selected offence relies upon the character of the act achieved (actus reus) but additionally upon the character of aim or know-how (mens rea) with which it’s far carried out. Section 319 defined the nature of the actus reus, which might constitute the offence of voluntarily causing harm, punishable under Section 323, and Section 321 describes the mens rea necessary to represent that offence. Goal and information need to be proved. The person in reality hurt wants now not always be the person who becomes intended to be hurt. Section 321 describes the situations that dress the act with factors of criminal activity, making it an offence.
 

What is the Trial Procedure in a Section 323 case?

The trial procedure for a case instituted under Section 323 of IPC is similar to that of any other criminal case. The procedure is as follows:

1. First Information Report: Under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a FIR or First Information Report is registered. FIR puts the case into motion. A FIR is information given by someone (aggrieved) to the police relating to committing of an offense.

2. Investigation: The next step after the filing of FIR is the investigation by the investigating officer. A conclusion is made by the investigating officer by examining facts and circumstances, collecting evidence, examining various persons and taking their statements in writing and all the other steps necessary for completing the investigation and then that conclusion is filed to the magistrate as a police report.

3. Charges: If after considering the police report and other important documents the accused is not discharged then the court frames charges under which he is to be tried. In a warrant case, the charges should be framed in writing.

4. Plea of guilty: Section 241 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 talks about the plea of guilty, after framing of the charges the accused is given an opportunity to plead guilty, and the responsibility lies with the judge to ensure that the plea of guilt was voluntarily made. The judge may upon its discretion convict the accused.

5. Prosecution evidence: After the charges are framed, and the accused pleads not guilty, then the court requires the prosecution to produce evidence to prove the guilt of the accused. The prosecution is required to support their evidence with statements from its witnesses. This process is called “examination in chief”. The magistrate has the power to issue summons to any person as a witness or order him to produce any document.

6. Statement of the accused: Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code gives an opportunity to the accused to be heard and explain the facts and circumstances of the case. The statements of accused are not recorded under oath and can be used against him in the trial.

7. Defence evidence: An opportunity is given to the accused in a case where he is not being acquitted to produce so as to defend his case. The defense can produce both oral and documentary evidence. In India, since the burden of proof is on the prosecution the defense, in general, is not required to give any defense evidence.

8. Judgment: The final decision of the court with reasons given in support of the acquittal or conviction of the accused is known as judgment. In case the accused is acquitted, the prosecution is given time to appeal against the order of the court. When the person is convicted, then both sides are invited to give arguments on the punishment which is to be awarded. This is usually done when the person is convicted of an offense whose punishment is life imprisonment or capital punishment.
 

What is the Procedure of Appeal in a case under Section 323?

Except for the statutory provisions laid down by The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any other law which is in force, an appeal cannot lie from any judgment or an order of a criminal court. Thus, there is no vested right to appeal as such as even the first appeal will be subjected to statutory limitations. The justification behind this principle is that the courts which try a case are competent enough with the presumption that the trial has been conducted fairly. However, as per the proviso, the victim has a right to appeal against any order passed by the Court under special circumstances comprising of a judgment of acquittal, conviction for lesser offence or inadequate compensation.
 
Generally, same sets of rules and procedures are employed to govern the appeals in the Sessions Courts and High Courts (highest court of appeal in a state and enjoys more powers in matters where appeal is permissible). The highest court of appeal in the country is the Supreme Court and hence, it enjoys the most extensive discretionary and plenary powers in the cases of appeals. Its powers are largely governed by the provisions laid down in, Indian Constitution, and the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), 1970.
 
The accused has been given the right to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment of the High Court if the High Court has reversed an order of his acquittal on appeal by convicting him, thereby, sentencing him to imprisonment for life or for ten years or more, or to death. Understanding the relevance of a criminal appeal being made to the Supreme Court, the same law has also been laid down in Article 134(1) of the Indian Constitution under the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, has also been passed by the legislature in consonance with Article 134(2) of the Indian Constitution to confer additional powers on the Supreme Court to entertain and hear appeals from the High Court under certain conditions.
 
A similar right to appeal has been granted to one or all accused persons if more than one person have been convicted in a trial and such order has been passed by the court. However, there are certain circumstances under which no appeal shall lie. These provisions have been laid down under Section 265G, Section 375 and Section 376 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
 

How to get Bail in a Section 323 case?

In order to apply for bail when accused under Section 323 of the IPC, the accused will have to submit an application for bail in the court. The court will then send the summons to the other party and will fix a date for the hearing. On the date of hearing, the court will hear arguments from both sides and would give a decision based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
 
In case the accused has an apprehension of an arrest under Section 323 of the IPC, he or she can also file an application for anticipatory bail with the help of a criminal lawyer. The lawyer will file the anticipatory bail application in the requisite court having the authority to adjudge the particular criminal matter along with a vakalatnama. The court will then notify a public prosecutor about the anticipatory bail application and would ask him to file objections, if any. Thereafter, the court will appoint a date of hearing and after hearing the final arguments of both the parties would give a judgment based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
 

What are your Prospects of Getting a Government Job when Charged for Hurt under Section 323?

If a criminal case has ever been instituted against an individual then it breaks down the chances of getting employment opportunities in the government sector, with this pre-conceived notion formed already people sometimes tend to avoid such disclosures in the employment forms that ask for disclosures pertaining to pendency of any criminal suit, institutions of FIR’s, etc.
 
The important thing to understand at this very point is the fact that the suit that may have been instituted against a person may not directly involve what is expected of such a person from his employment engagements but lying about the very same can lead to automatic disqualification as there are also background checks that the employer may conduct as part of its recruiting process and if lied upon in the application, that can very easily resurface by the medium of background checks and the likes and in such a case, the person can be disqualified even if he has been provided employment on the grounds of misrepresentation.
 
It is also pertinent to be noted here that as per law it is the screening that has to decide that whether the pendency of the criminal suit would have any bearing on the nature of one’s post in the basis of the allegations levelled against a person in the FIR and charges (if any). Also just being implicated does not mean being convicted and as a general rule, a person is innocent until proven guilty applies and one cannot be deprived of his employment just on the basis of a pending case against someone, although there still exist a few exceptions here as well, where the nature of employment is sensitive like in the paramilitary or military services then one can be denied employment just on the basis of a first information report or a pending suit.
 

Testimonials

  1. “Me and my father got into a fight with my neighbour who was wrongfully trying to capture part of our land. We tried to resolve the issue peacefully but he was too agitated to listen. That is when it got physical and he started hitting me and my father with a stick which in turn seriously injured my father. We went to the police station straight away after the incident and with the help of our lawyer, filed a complaint. The case was then taken up by the Court, which sentenced him a jail term along with a fine.”

-Raj Kaushik
 

  1. “I was going back home from my college when I came across two guys who wanted to mug me. When I refused and started to create a scene, they hit me with a helmet that one of the guys were holding and ran away. My friends who were nearby saw me and took me for the first aid. After which I went away to the police station and filed a complaint against the two. The two of them were later on captured by the police and taken into custody. The Court after analyzing the case imprisoned them for 6 months.”

-Ankit Chandra
 

  1. “My son got into a fight with a guy who was jealous of him because he liked the girl my son was dating. Due to which a case under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code was filed against him. My son wanted to appear for the Civil Services examination. However, he was unsure if he could make it because of the criminal charges he was facing. That is when we consulted a lawyer from LawRato.com who helped us understand the nitty-gritties involved and also guided my son to appear for the exam. My son is now an IAS officer, thanks to LawRato.”

-Vibhuti Jain
 

  1. “My daughter was married to this guy who used to hit her all the time because of his short temper. One day he hit her so hard that it almost broke her neck. When I got to know about what my daughter was going through, I immediately consulted a lawyer and filed a case against my son-in-law. He was immediately arrested and a case of domestic violence and culpable homicide not amounting to murder was filed against him. Upon thorough investigation ordered by Court, he was found guilty and was imprisoned for a term of 6 years.”

-Sunaina Singh
 

  1. “I was coming back from a movie with my brother when these guys who were drunk tried to bully us. One of them was carrying a gun and tried to frighten us with the same. we immediately surrendered but they were not amused enough, they started hitting my brother and inflicted serious injuries upon him due to which his leg was broken. I filed a case against them for assault. They were immediately arrested and were imprisoned for 2 years by the Court.”

-Ram Sharma
 

Important Judgments Related to Section 323

  1. Government of Bombay v. Abdul Wahab (AIR 1946 Bom 38)

In Government of Bombay v. Abdul Wahab (AIR 1946 Bom 38) the court observed that the line between culpable homicide not amounting to murder and grievous hurt is very thin. In one case the injuries must be such as are likely to cause death and in the other they endanger life.
 

  1. Laxman v State of Maharashtra AIR 1974 SC 1803

It was held in this case that, “Where death results on account of grievous hurt and evidence shows that the intention of the assailants was to cause death, the case would fall under Sec. 302 and not under Sec. 325.”
 

  1. State of Karnataka v. Shivlingaiah AIR 1988 SC 115

Where an accused squeezed the testicles of a victim resulting in his death almost instantaneously and the incident took place all of a sudden, it could not be said that the accused had any intention causing the death of deceased nor could he be attributed with knowledge that such act was likely to cause his cardiac arrest resulting in his death. It was held that the case fell under Sec. 325.
 

  1. Rambaran Mahton v The State (AIR 1958 Pat 452)

In Rambaran Mahton v The State (AIR 1958 Pat 452), the deceased and the accused were brothers. On one day, an altercation took place between two, the accused dashed the deceased to the ground and sat upon his stomach and hit him with fists and slaps. The deceased became senseless and eventually died. The deceased had received some serious injuries on the head, chest and the spleen.
 

Is it Important to Hire a Lawyer for Cases Related to Section 323?

Having a lawyer to defend you is a right. This is why, if you cannot afford an attorney, the court can appoint one for you. A person can also renounce this right and can even represent himself in his own criminal case. However, this is not recommended especially in a case where your charges are severe and you can possibly face jail time, such as the one mentioned under section 323 of IPC. 

Even if you believe you have committed the crime and you wish to plead guilty, it is extremely important to consult an experienced criminal advocate before responding to any criminal prosecution. At the very minimum, a skilled attorney can ensure that the charges against you are appropriate given the facts of the case and advocate on your behalf to receive the lowest possible penalty.

Being charged with a crime, such as the one under section 323, is a serious matter. A person facing criminal charges risks severe penalties and consequences, such as jail time, having a criminal record, loss of relationships and future job prospects, among other things. While some legal matters can be handled alone, a criminal arrest of any nature warrants the legal advice of a qualified criminal defense attorney who can protect your rights and secure the best possible outcome for your case.

FAQ's on IPC Section 323


What offence is defined under IPC 323?

IPC 323 Offence: Voluntarily causing hurt.


What is the punishment for IPC 323 Case?

The punishment for IPC 323 is 1 Year or Fine or Both.


Is IPC 323 cognizable offence or non-cognizable offence?

IPC 323 is a Non-Cognizable.


How to file/defend your case for IPC 323 offence?

Use LawRato for filing/defending your case under IPC 323 with the help of best criminal lawyers near you.


Is IPC 323 bailable or non-bailable offence?

IPC 323 is a Bailable offence.


In what court can IPC 323 be tried?

IPC 323 is tried in the court of Any Magistrate.


Legal Questions Answered by Top Lawyers on IPC 323


Related Topics