No Mini-Trial at Cognizance: Rajasthan High Court Sets Aside Magistrate Order Limiting Assault Death Case to Culpable Homicide

After a man died on 28.09.2022, eight days after an alleged assault with sticks, the police filed a negative final report, attributing the death to cardiac arrest (paras 5, 11). On the complainant's protest petition, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu took cognizance on 07.02.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 458 and 304 Part II IPC, and the revisional court rejected both sides' revisions on 11.09.2024 (paras 3-4, 12). The accused sought quashing; the complainant argued that Section 302 was attracted (paras 5, 7). The petitions were heard on priority under the Supreme Court's directions in Vijay Kumar (paras 1-2).

Prima facie, the deceased was assaulted and suffered multiple injuries (para 14). Whether those injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death, and whether the act was culpable homicide or murder, could not be decided at cognizance, when only a prima facie case is to be seen (para 14). Following Ghulam Hassan Beigh, where the Supreme Court set aside a charge confined to Section 304 on a post-mortem finding of cardio-respiratory failure, the Court noted that a post-mortem report is not substantive evidence and the nexus between the assault and death must be tested at trial (para 16). The Magistrate's finding that the injuries were not on vital parts, so there was no intention to kill, was premature and contrary to settled law (paras 17-19). Recording such a finding at the initial stage amounted to an abuse of process (para 19).