The Jharkhand High Court has set aside the attempt to murder conviction of Md. Wahid @ Md. Abdul Wahid @ Abdul Wahid. The case arose from an alleged jhaar-phoonk (ritual healing) session involving a 14-year-old girl. Justice Rajesh Kumar upheld the remaining convictions but ordered the appellant’s release, as he had already spent more than four years in custody.
Background
The Special Judge (POCSO), Chatra, had convicted him on 15 June 2023 under Sections 341, 342, 323, 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 8 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Witchcraft Prevention Act. The longest term was six years’ rigorous imprisonment with a Rs 5,000 fine under Section 307. All sentences were to run concurrently.
The FIR, registered on 30 March 2022 at Lawalong police station, alleged that the girl fell ill around Holi. The accused allegedly promised to cure her. On the night of 26 March 2022, her parents were reportedly made to wait outside the room, and the girl was beaten and burnt with a candle and incense stick over several days. The FIR also carried an allegation of sexual assault.
Twelve witnesses were examined. The girl’s relatives said in cross-examination that they had not seen the incident, and an independent witness denied any jhaar-phoonk or injury. The doctor said she found no sexual assault injury or evidence of rape. The victim supported the prosecution’s version.
The appellant’s counsel confined the challenge to Section 307 IPC. He argued there was no intention to cause death, nor any injury sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death. He also said no question on this charge was put to the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the stage at which an accused is asked to explain the evidence. The State supported the conviction but could not point to any injury or intention that attracted Section 307.
The High Court found that the injury and evidence were enough to sustain the convictions under Sections 341, 342, 323 and 324 IPC and the Witchcraft Prevention Act. It held that Section 8 of the POCSO Act was also attracted, noting the “bad touch” described by the victim, who was about 14 years old.
On Section 307, the Court observed:
“So far as conviction of the appellant under Section 307 IPC is concerned, the law is settled that there must be ingredient of culpable homicide amounting to murder, but that has failed. In the present case, neither the prosecution story nor the injury caused or in any way the ingredients of 307 IPC has been even presented by the prosecution. In the absence of necessary ingredients for conviction under Section 307, the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 is bad in law.”
The High Court set aside the conviction under Section 307 IPC. It noted that the maximum sentence for the remaining offences was four years, while the appellant had remained in custody for more than four years. It therefore directed his release forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.
The appeal was disposed of with these modifications.
Case Details
Case Title: Md. Wahid v. The State of Jharkhand & Another
Case Number: Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 484 of 2023
Judge: Justice Rajesh Kumar
Decision Date: 05 October 2026
