Injury causing hole in eardrum without 100% loss of hearing capacity would not amount to grievous hurt: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court in the case Nazim And 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another observed and has held that if any injury is being caused in the nature of a hole in the eardrum and such an injury does not amount to ‘grievous hurt’, if the same does not cause a hundred per cent loss of hearing capacity as per provision stated under section 320 (thirdly) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The bench headed by Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma in the case observed and has quashed the order of the ACJM Ist, Aligarh, wherein the court summoned the accused applicants to face trial as stated under Section 326 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means) of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The court in the case observed that for such kind of act of inflicting injury (causing a hole in the eardrum) to fall under the category of ‘grievous hurt’, the same has to be shown by way of medical evidence that there being a permanent privation of the hearing of ear or hundred per cent loss of hearing capacity.

It has also been noted by the bench that the injuries were caused by stick in the right ear of the victim by the accused and the same does not amount to ‘grievous hurt’ as there being no medical report that there has been permanent loss of hearing capacity of victim’s ear and hence, the court cannot cover the same under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

In the present case, the accused named Nazim was summoned by the ACJM Ist, Aligarh to face trial under

Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as the court in the case concluded that the accused had caused a hole in the drum of the right ear of the injured opposite party no. 2 Smt. Rukhsana.

The court in its order stated while discussing the scope of Sections 320 and Section 326 of the IPC, 1860. Thus, the court opined that the injuries caused to the victim were grievous in nature and in the opinion of E.N.T Surgeon there being a hole in the right ear drum, the same amounts to grievous hurt.

Therefore, the accused, Nazim moved the High Court, while challenging the same on the ground that the medical report and the supplementary medical report of the victim did not make out any offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and she did not appear before the medical board despite the order of the S.S.P and C.M.O for her re-medical examination in order to ascertain the nature of injury.

Further, the court observed that the injuries being caused by a stick in the right ear of the victim by Naazim cannot be said to be the grievous hurt as there being no medical report which states that there has been permanent loss of hearing capacity in her right ear. Therefore, it cannot be stated that such injury is being covered under Section 326 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Accordingly, the court allowed the application of the accused and has quashed the summoning order.

The counsel, Devendra Dahma, Sanjay Mishra appeared for the applicant.

The counsel, G.a.,ravi Prakash Singh represented the opposite party.