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

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:-

Bodily pain, or

Disease, or

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.