SESSION 2023-24

PROJECT ON

Offence against human body:Hurt and Grevious Hurt

SUBMITTED TO; SUBMITTED BY;

Dr. Varsha Dhabhai Hitendra Singh Beedawat

FACULTY OF LAW STUDENT OF SEMESTER 4th

 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

DECLARATION

I declare that the project entitled “ Offence against human body:Hurt and Grevious Hurt
” is the outcome of my own work conducted under the supervision of Dr. Varsha Dhabhai
Jagannath University, Jaipur.

I further declare that to the best of my Knowledge the project does not contain any part of any
work, which has been submitted for the award of any degree either in this University or in
another University / Deemed University without proper citation

Khushi Devi Sharma

Dated : -

2
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

CERTIFICATE OF THE SUPERVISOR

This is to certify that the research work entitled “Offence against human body:Hurt and
Grevious Hurt” is the work done by Hitendra Singh Beedawat under my guidance and
supervision for the Partial fulfillment of the requirement of BA/BBA LLB degree at
Jagannath University.

To the best of my Knowledge and belief the project:

1. Embodies the work of the candidate himself;

2. Has been duly completed; and
3. Is up to the standard both in respect of contents and language for being referred to
the examiner.

Dr.Varsha Dhabhai

Faculty of Law

Supervisor

3
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express profound gratitude to Dr. Varsha Dhabhai, for her invaluable
support, encouragement, supervision and useful suggestions throughout this research work.
Her moral support and continuous guidance enabled me to complete my work successfully.
Her intellectual thrust and blessings motivated me to work rigorously on this study. In fact
this study could not have seen the light of the day if her contribution had not been available.
It would be no exaggeration to say that it is Her unflinching faith and unquestioning support
that has provided the sustenance necessary to see it through to its present shape.

I express my deep sincere gratitude towards my parents and friends for their blessing,
patience, and moral support for this project.

Hitendra Singh Beedawat

4
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1) Declaration…..............................................................................................................2
2) Certificate of supervisor…..........................................................................................3
3) Acknowledgement.......................................................................................................4
4) Table to contents..........................................................................................................5
5) Table of cases...............................................................................................................6
6) Introduction..................................................................................................................7
7) Who is Muslim.............................................................................................................7
8) Sources of Muslim Law...............................................................................................9
9) Al-Qur’an.....................................................................................................................9
10) Sunnah & Hadith (Ahadis)........................................................................................11
a) Difference between Sunna and Hadith...................................................................12
11) Ijma...........................................................................................................................12
a) Kinds of ijma............................................................................................................13
12) Qiyas.........................................................................................................................13
a) Conditions of Validity of Qiyas..............................................................................14
13) Legislation................................................................................................................15
14) Customs....................................................................................................................16
15) Judicial decisions.....................................................................................................17
16) Justice, equity and good conscience.........................................................................18
17) Conclusion...............................................................................................................19
18) Bibliography.............................................................................................................20

5
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

TABLE OF CASES

S No. CASES PAGE NO.

1. 10

2. 17

3. 17

4. 18

5. 18

6. 18

6
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTION

• HURT
Hurt, as defined in Section 319 of the IPC, refers to any bodily injury that causes
pain or impairment to health, but is not life-threatening or likely to cause any
permanent disability. The term "hurt" encompasses a wide range of physical
injuries, from minor bruises and cuts to more significant wounds requiring medical
attention. It is important to note that hurt does not necessarily entail grievous bodily
harm, but rather signifies any form of bodily harm that causes discomfort or
suffering to the victim.Whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any
person is said to cause hurt.

This section defines hurt. It says that whoever causes bodily pain, disease or
infirmity to any person commits hurt. The duration of the pain is not important. But
if the harm is so slight that a person of ordinary sense and temper would not
complain about it, section 95 would apply and the accused would not be liable.
Disease is any kind of illness while infirmity is the inability of an organ to perform
its normal function which may be temporary or permanent. This may be both
physical or mental, and a temporary impairment or hysteria or terror has been held
to be infirmity.' The definition nowhere suggests that a contact with the body is
essential for causing hurt.

Where the accused in the darkness of night spoke in a piercing voice and extended
his hand Fointing a pistol as a result of which the woman victim was terrorised to
unconsciousness, this was held to be a hurt. Hurt may be caused along with an
assault, and it may be independent of an assault as well.

• GRIEVOUS HURT

.-The following kinds of hurt only are designated as "grievous" :—

First.-Emasculation.

Secondly. —Permanent privation of the sight of either eye.

Thirdly.-Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear.

Fourthly.-Privation of any member or joint.

Fifthly.-Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.

Sixthly.-Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.

7
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

Seventhly.-Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.

Eightly.-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.

On the other hand, Grievous Hurt, as stipulated in Section 320 of the IPC, pertains
to more severe bodily injuries that result in substantial or permanent damage to
health, or pose a threat to life. Unlike hurt, grievous hurt encompasses injuries of a
grave nature that have serious and lasting consequences for the victim. This
includes injuries such as fractures, dislocations, burns, and injuries endangering
vital organs or bodily functions. Grievous hurt is distinguished from hurt by the
degree of harm inflicted and the potential for long-term repercussions on the
victim's well-being.

This section designates certain kinds of hurt as grievous hurt. It says that the
following kinds of hurt are designated as grievous: emasculation, permanent
privation of the sight of any of the eyes, permanent privation of the hearing of any
of the ears, privation of any member or joint, destroying or permanently impairing
the powers of any member or joint, permanently disfiguring the head or face,
fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth, and any hurt which either endangers life
or which causes the victim to be in severe bodily pain during the space of twenty
days, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits. Though the task of designating
grievous hurts was not an easy one, the authors of the Code tried their best and they
took a considerable time to come to a reasonable conclusion while designating the
eight specific instances under this section.

Firstly.-Under the first clause emasculation means deprivation of the properties of

a male, or deprivation of masculine vigour, or castration.

Secondly.—Under the second clause, the privation of the sight of either eye must
be permanent. Temporary privation of sight, therefore, does not amount to grievous
hurt.Privation means state of being deprived of.

Thirdly.—Under the third clause, privation, that is to say, state of being deprived
of, of the hearing of either ear, must be permanent. Therefore, temporary privation
of hearing does not amount to grievous hurt.

Fourthly.-Under the fourth clause, privation of any member or joint is grievous

hurt. Member means distinct part of a whole, especially a limb. Under this clause,
the privation does not need to be permanent.
8
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

Fifthly.-Under the fifth clause, destruction of the power of any member or joint, or
permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint amounts to grievous
hurt.
In case of not destruction but impairment only, the impairment must be permanent
and, therefore, mere temporary impairment of powers of any member or joint does
not amount to grievous hurt.

Sixthly.-Under the sixth clause, permanent disfiguration of the head or face

amounts to grievous hurt. Disfiguration means spoiling the figure, or changing to
worse form, or spoiling the beauty, or deforming. Therefore, cutting off nose or
ears, branding the cheeks with red-hot iron,cut inflicted by a sharp razor on the face
are all grievous hurts under this section. The disfiguration must, however, be
permanent and not temporary. A partial cut of skull vault is grievous hurt because it
is a fracture.

Seventhly.-Under the seventh clause, fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth is

grievous hurt. An important reason as to why fracture or dislocation has been
designated as grievous hurt may perhaps be that the same causes great pain and

suffering to the victim. Loosening of four teeth, or a scratch or cut not across the
boneS cannot be held to be grievous hurt. But where a bone is cut to a depth of half
an inch." does amount to grievous hurt. Break by cutting or splintering of bone, or
rupture or fissure in it, is a fracture and hence grievous hurt.

In Jameel v. State of Unar Pradesh the appellant allegedly assaulted the vicim
with lathis. Injury was inflicted on left side of head about seven centimetres above
the left eyebrow and there was a fracture of left parietal bone. This comes under the
seventh clause of Section 320 for which a sentence of 2 years imprisonment is
reasonable and there is no ground for its reduction.

Eighthly.—Under the eighth clause, any hurt which endangers life or which causes
the victim to be during the space of twenty days in severe bodily pain, or unable to
follow his ordinary pursuits amounts to grievous hurt. Where a doctor describes an
injury as dangerous to life, he means that this is a hurt which endangers life, and so
the injury is grievous hurt.Throwing sulphuric acid causing severe acid burns, and
inflicting a blow on the abdomen by a knife, are grievous hurts as they fall under
this clause. But inflicting such injuries by a chain as were not endangering life and
where the victim remained in the hospital for thirteen days, were not grievous hurts.

Where the accused in course of an altercation with the complainant on a dark night
aimed a stick blow on his head, but the complainant's wife with a child in her arms
having intervened the blow fell on it resulting in its death, the accused was held
guilty of causing simple hurt only, and not even grievous hurt, because had the
9
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

blow fallen on the complainant on whom it was aimed, it would have caused him

simple hurt only, Similarly, where the accused gave violent blows on the head and
shoulder of a woman carrying a child in her hands, and one of the blows fell on the
head of the child resulting in its death, it was held that the circumstances made the
act of the accused serious and consequently he was guilty of causing grievous hurt?
Where three accused persons attacked the deceased and one of the blows on his
head fractured the skull and then a lathi was thrust in his anus which caused shock
and contributed to the death, it was held that the accused were not guilty of
culpable homicide not amounting to murder but of grievous hurt only.

Where the accused persons raped an eleven year old girl and then thrust a stick into
her private part as a result of which she died, it was held that in absence of evidence
that the injury caused was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death
the accused were guilty of causing grievous hurt. only.' Where the accused pulled
out the deceased from a cot, kicked him and gave him stick blows in the region of
his diseased spleen resulting in his death, he was held guilty of causing grievous
hurt only because the accused did not know that the deceased was suffering from
diseased spleen. Where a lady and her nephew, allegedly along with the husband of
the lady, tied the victim to an electric pole and gave him a sound thrashing because
he had given publicity to an alleged love affair between the lady and her nephew, it
was held that in the absence of proper evidence against the husband, he could not
be held
hurt gulty of any offence but the lady and the nephew were liable for causing

grievous Where the accused thrashed the sixty year old deceased because he had
impounded cattle belonging to the accused and had refused to surrender the same,
and the deceased who

• DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN HURT & GREVIOUS HURT

Hurt and Grievous Hurt, as delineated in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), represent
distinct categories of bodily harm inflicted upon individuals. Section 319 of the IPC
defines Hurt as bodily injuries that cause pain or impairment to health but are not
life-threatening or likely to cause permanent disability. It encompasses a broad
spectrum of physical injuries, including bruises, cuts, abrasions, and minor wounds,
which may necessitate medical attention but do not result in substantial or
permanent damage to health.

In contrast, Grievous Hurt, as outlined in Section 320 of the IPC, pertains to more
severe bodily injuries that result in substantial or permanent damage to health or
pose a threat to life. These injuries are of a grave nature, encompassing fractures,
dislocations, burns, or injuries endangering vital organs or bodily functions.
10
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

Grievous Hurt entails injuries that may lead to prolonged hospitalization, surgeries,
permanent disability, or even death, depending on the severity of the harm inflicted.

The severity and impact of Hurt and Grievous Hurt differ significantly. Hurt
typically involves minor injuries that cause temporary discomfort, pain, or
inconvenience to the victim. While hurt may require medical treatment or first aid,
it generally does not result in significant impairment or long-term consequences for
the victim's health. Grievous Hurt, on the other hand, entails more serious injuries
that cause substantial physical harm, impairment, or endangerment to life. These
injuries may lead to long-term consequences, permanent disability, or even death,
depending on their severity.

Several factors determine the severity of hurt or grievous hurt, including the nature
and extent of the bodily injury inflicted upon the victim. The severity of the harm
inflicted and the intention behind it play a crucial role in distinguishing between
hurt and grievous hurt. Grievous Hurt often involves a greater degree of malice,
recklessness, or intention to cause serious harm on the part of the perpetrator,
compared to cases of hurt where the injuries may be accidental or less severe.
Legally, offenses involving hurt are considered less severe than those involving
grievous hurt under the IPC. Perpetrators found guilty of causing hurt may face
lighter penalties, such as imprisonment for up to one year or a fine, depending on
the circumstances of the case. In contrast, grievous hurt carries more stringent legal
consequences, including longer terms of imprisonment and heavier fines.

Perpetrators convicted of causing grievous hurt may face imprisonment for up to

seven years or a fine, or both, depending on the severity of the injuries inflicted.

To illustrate the differentiation between hurt and grievous hurt, consider the
following examples: Hurt may involve actions such as slapping, pushing, or
punching someone, resulting in minor bruises or scratches. In contrast, grievous

hurt may entail more severe acts, such as beating someone with a blunt object,
resulting in fractures or serious internal injuries. Stabbing or shooting someone,
causing severe wounds, organ damage, or permanent disability, would also
constitute grievous hurt under the law.

•LEGAL FRAMEWORK REGARDING HURT & GREVIOUS HURT

The Indian Penal Code (IPC), enacted in 1860, serves as the primary criminal code
of India, defining various offenses and prescribing penalties for their commission.
It is a comprehensive statute that delineates the legal framework for addressing
criminal acts and maintaining law and order within the country. The IPC covers a
11
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

wide range of criminal offenses, including those related to bodily harm or injuries
inflicted upon individuals.

• Overview of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

The IPC consists of 511 sections, organized into 23 chapters, each dealing with
specific categories of offenses. It provides a comprehensive framework for defining
and punishing criminal conduct, encompassing offenses against persons, property,
public tranquility, and the state. The code is based on English criminal law
principles but incorporates adaptations and modifications tailored to the Indian
context.

• Relevant Sections Pertaining to Hurt and Grievous Hurt

Two key sections of the IPC address offenses related to bodily harm: Section 319
deals with Hurt, while Section 320 addresses Grievous Hurt. These sections
provide legal definitions of the respective offenses, delineate the elements
constituting them, and prescribe penalties for their commission.

Section 319 :- Hurt

Section 319 of the IPC defines Hurt as causing bodily pain, disease, or infirmity to
another person. It encompasses a broad spectrum of physical injuries that result in
discomfort or impairment to health but are not life-threatening or likely to cause
permanent disability. The section outlines the elements constituting the offense of
Hurt, including the actus reus (physical act) and mens rea (criminal intent or
knowledge) required for its commission.

To establish the offense of Hurt under Section 319, the prosecution must prove that
the accused:
Intentionally or knowingly caused bodily pain, disease, or infirmity to another
person.

Acted without lawful justification or excuse.

The section prescribes penalties for the offense of Hurt, which may include
imprisonment for up to one year, a fine, or both, depending on the severity of the
harm inflicted and the circumstances of the case. The court may also consider
factors such as the victim's age, vulnerability, and relationship with the accused in
determining the appropriate punishment.

Section 320: Grievous Hurt

Section 320 of the IPC defines Grievous Hurt as causing severe bodily injury or
endangering life, resulting in substantial or permanent damage to health. It
12
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

encompasses more serious forms of physical harm that pose a threat to life or cause
lasting impairment or disability to the victim. The section delineates the elements
constituting the offense of Grievous Hurt and prescribes penalties for its
commission.
To establish the offense of Grievous Hurt under Section 320, the prosecution must

prove that the accused:

Inflicted severe bodily injury or endangerment to life, resulting in substantial or
permanent damage to health.
Acted with the intention to cause such harm or with knowledge that it was likely to
occur.
Acted without lawful justification or excuse.
The section specifies various forms of bodily injury that constitute Grievous Hurt,
including fractures, dislocations, burns, injuries endangering vital organs, or
causing permanent disability. The severity of the injuries and their impact on the
victim's health are crucial factors in determining the gravity of the offense.

Elements of the Offenses

Both Hurt and Grievous Hurt offenses involve the infliction of bodily harm or
injuries upon individuals but differ in terms of severity and legal consequences.
The key elements of the offenses include:

Actus Reus: The physical act or conduct of the accused resulting in bodily harm or
injury to another person.
Mens Rea: The mental state or intention of the accused at the time of committing
the offense, which may range from intention to cause harm to reckless disregard for
the consequences of one's actions.
Causation: The direct or indirect causal link between the accused's conduct and the
resulting bodily harm or injury to the victim.

Absence of Lawful Justification: The absence of any lawful justification, excuse, or

legal authority for the accused's actions, such as self-defense or necessity, which
would otherwise mitigate criminal liability.

In, Sections 319 and 320 of the IPC provide the legal framework for addressing
offenses related to bodily harm or injuries, distinguishing between Hurt and
Grievous Hurt based on the severity of the harm inflicted and the intent of the
perpetrator. Understanding the elements and provisions of these sections is
essential for the effective prosecution and adjudication of cases involving acts of
violence or physical harm against individuals.

13
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

• Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt

Section 323 prescribes the punishment for voluntarily causing hurt. Offenders
convicted of this offense may be liable to imprisonment for a term which may
extend to one year, or with a fine, or both. The severity of the punishment depends
on various factors, including the gravity of the injuries inflicted, the circumstances
of the case, and the criminal history of the accused.

The offense of voluntarily causing hurt is considered a relatively less serious form
of physical harm compared to grievous hurt. However, it still constitutes a criminal
offense under the IPC and is punishable by law. Prosecuting authorities must
establish all the requisite elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt to
secure a conviction against the accused.

Section 323 of the IPC serves as a crucial provision for addressing cases involving
the voluntary infliction of bodily harm or injuries upon individuals. By delineating
the elements of the offense and prescribing appropriate penalties, the law seeks to
deter and punish acts of violence while safeguarding the rights and well-being of
individuals within society.

Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) outlines the punishment for voluntarily
causing hurt. This provision serves as a deterrent against individuals who
intentionally inflict bodily harm on others. Offenders found guilty under this
section can face imprisonment for a term that may extend to one year, or they may
be fined, or both. It's crucial to understand that causing hurt, even if done
voluntarily, is a punishable offense under the law.

The severity of the punishment depends on various factors, including the extent of
the injury inflicted, the intent behind the act, and any mitigating or aggravating
circumstances. Courts take into account the gravity of the offense and the impact it
has on the victim while determining the appropriate punishment.
When interpreting and applying this provision, courts exercise caution to ensure
that the punishment fits the crime. They consider the nature and severity of the
injuries sustained by the victim, the degree of force used by the offender, and any
premeditation or malice involved in the act.

For example, if someone gets into a physical altercation and causes minor injuries
to another person, they may be charged under Section 323. In such cases, the court
may impose a lesser sentence, such as a fine, especially if the injuries are not severe
and there are no aggravating circumstances.

However, if the hurt inflicted results in significant harm or if there is evidence of

14
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

premeditation or malicious intent, the court may opt for a harsher punishment. In

cases where the victim suffers serious injuries or lasting consequences, the offender
could face imprisonment in addition to or instead of a fine.

It's essential for individuals to exercise restraint and refrain from resorting to
violence or causing harm to others. The law emphasizes the importance of
resolving conflicts through peaceful means and upholding the rights and dignity of
every individual. Offenders who disregard these principles and engage in acts of
violence are held accountable under the law and may face legal consequences
accordingly.

• CASE STUDY

Ratanlal v. State of Maharashtra (1978): In this seminal case, the Supreme Court
provided a comprehensive analysis of the definition of "hurt" under Section 319 of
the IPC. The court emphasized that even minor injuries, such as scratches or
bruises, qualify as hurt if they cause pain or impair bodily health. For instance, the
court noted that a slap or a push resulting in temporary discomfort constitutes hurt
under the law. This case set a precedent for a broad interpretation of hurt,
encompassing various degrees of physical harm.

Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab (2010): In Makhan Singh's case, the Supreme
Court delved into the distinction between hurt and grievous hurt as outlined in
Sections 319 and 320 of the IPC. The court clarified that grievous hurt pertains to
injuries of a more severe nature, such as fractures, dislocations, or injuries
endangering life or causing permanent disfigurement. For example, the court cited
instances where grievous hurt includes bone fractures, severe burns, or injuries
leading to long-term impairment. This case provided valuable insights into the
categorization of injuries based on their severity.

Examination of Court Decisions and Legal Reasoning

State of Kerala v. Mohan Nair (1996): In a significant ruling, the court examined
the requisite intention or knowledge necessary for the offense of causing hurt or
grievous hurt. The court emphasized that the prosecution must establish that the
accused had the intention to cause the specific injury or had knowledge that their
actions were likely to result in such harm. For instance, in cases where an
individual strikes another with a dangerous weapon, the court held that the
intention to cause harm is implicit. This case underscored the importance of
proving the accused's mental state beyond a reasonable doubt.

15
 JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

Bhagwan Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2018): This case explored the applicability
of self-defense in matters involving hurt or grievous hurt. The court reiterated that
individuals have the right to defend themselves against unlawful aggression, but the
force used must be proportionate to the threat faced. For example, if an individual
uses excessive force in self-defense, causing grievous harm to the aggressor, they
may be held liable for excessive use of force. This case highlighted the delicate
balance between the right to self-defense and the duty to avoid unnecessary harm.

Lessons Learned and Implications for Future Cases

Ashraf Ali v. State of West Bengal (2005): In a notable judgment, the court
considered the role of provocation as a mitigating factor in cases involving hurt or
grievous hurt. The court recognized that individuals may act impulsively under
provocation, but such provocation must be sudden and grave to warrant a reduction
in liability. For instance, if an individual responds to verbal insults with physical
violence, the court may consider the degree of provocation in determining the
appropriate punishment. This case underscored the importance of considering the
circumstances surrounding the offense when assessing culpability.

These landmark cases provide valuable guidance for the interpretation and
application of provisions related to hurt and grievous hurt under the IPC. By
examining court decisions and legal reasoning in these cases, future cases can
benefit from a clearer understanding of the legal principles and precedents
governing offenses involving hurt and grievous hurt.

16