Source: Karnataka High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Karnataka High Court in the matter of Junaid B v. State of Karnataka has held that the minor offence within the provisions of Section 222 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) should essentially be a cognate offence of the major offence and not entirely a distinct and different offence constituted by altogether different ingredients.

What was the Background of Junaid B v. State of Karnataka Case?

• In this case, the appellant was initially charged with attempt of murder under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) but later he was convicted of offence under Section 326 of IPC.
• The Trial Court sentenced the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to pay the fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months.
• For the purpose of setting aside the aforesaid judgment, the appellant filed an appeal before the Karnataka High Court.
• The High Court held that in the case on hand also punishment provided for offence under Sections 307 and 326 IPC is same and therefore, the offence under Section 326 IPC is not a minor offence to offence under Section 307 of IPC so as to invoke Section 222(2) of CrPC.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• A single judge bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar observed that minor offence within the meaning of Section 222 of CrPC would not be something independent of the main offence or an offence merely involving lesser punishments. The minor offence should be composed of some of the ingredients constituting the main offence and be a part of it.
• The Court further distinguished that the term minor offence has to be interpreted in its ordinary sense and not technical sense. The test is not the gravity of punishment. When a person is charged with an offence, consisting of several particulars and if all the particulars are proved then it will constitute the major offence, while if some of those particulars are proved and their combination constitutes a minor offence, the accused can be convicted for the minor offence though he was not charged with it.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Involved in it?

Section 326 of IPC:

• This Section deals with voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
• It states that whoever, except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous 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 for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 222 of CrPC:

• This Section deals with the offence proved included in offence charged.
• It states that—

(1) When a person is charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of some only of which constitutes a complete minor offence, and such combination is proved, but the remaining particulars are not proved, he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it.

(2) When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, although he is not charged with it.

(3) When a person is charged with an offence, he may be convicted of an attempt to commit such offence although the attempt is not separately charged.

(4) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorize a conviction of any minor offence where the conditions requisite for the initiation of proceedings in respect of that minor offence have not been satisfied.