The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the presence of an injury is not necessary to make out an offence of attempt to murder punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court was considering a Petition challenging the legality of framing of charges in a case registered under Section 109(1) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The Bench of Justice Gajendra Singh held, "From the plain reading of Section 307 of IPC, it is clear that presence of injury is not sine qua non for making out an offence under Section 307 of IPC. If any act is done with an intention or knowledge that, if assailant by that act causes death, then the assailant would be guilty of murder, then such act would certainly be punishable under Section 307 of IPC."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Subodh Choudhary, while the Respondent was represented by Government Advocate Rajendra Singh Suryavanshi.

Facts of the Case

The charges were framed regarding an incident that occurred in front of a Police Station in which the victim sustained injury by knife. The trial Court framed the charges under Section 296, 109(1), 115(2) and 315(3) of the BNS, 2023.

The Revision was preferred only on the ground of medical report, in which it was opined that sharp incised wounds found on left arm were neither a deep wound nor dangerous to life and the second wound was also sharp incised wound and without treatment no chance of death. The wounds were not on a vital part of the body.

It was further argued that it is a clear case of misuse of law as well as process of law as the F.I.Rs were registered under the influence of complainant without seeking query from doctor in connection with Section 109(1) of the BNS, 2023

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset referred to the Supreme Court's decision in P.Vijayan vs. State of Kerala and another, (2010) and discussed the scope of exercise of power under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C.

It highlighted the settled legal position that at the stage of framing of charge or considering the Discharge Application, Mini Trial is impermissible which was established in State of Rajasthan vs. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, 2021 and later reiterated in CBI vs. Aryan Singh, 2023.

".....the nature of injuries is not a decisive factor to determine as to whether the act of the assailant would be an act punishable under Section 307 of IPC or not..", the Court held.

The Petition was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Vivek @vicky v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025:MPHC-IND:32712)

Click here to read/ download Order




Madhya Pradesh High CourtJustice Gajendra Singh

Sheetal Joon