Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Of offences affecting life
Section 307: Attempt to murder
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by life-convicts.—[When any person offending under this section is under sentence of [imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 307
-
Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Yadav v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Issue arose whether the courts below, in the attending facts and circumstances, justified in dismissing the application for summoning additional accused.
-
Tuhin Kumar Biswas @ Bumba v. The State of West Bengal
The Revision Petition filed by the Appellant-accused against the order dismissing the discharge application filed by the Appellant in FIR No.50/2020 dated 19.03.2020 lodged with police station Bidhannagar North, was…
-
Raj Kumar @ Bheema v. State of NCT of Delhi
Appellant-accused was convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC. The High Court further affirmed the order on sentence dated 20.02.2021, whereby the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for…
-
State of Chhattisgarh v. Amit Aishwarya Jogi
Whether the three-Judge Bench judgment in the case of Lalu Prasad Yadav and Anr. v. State of Bihar and Anr. lays down the correct proposition of law, or whether the same requires reference to, and resolution by a larger…
-
Zainul v. The State of Bihar
The High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellants herein and thereby affirmed the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 124 of 1989 holding the appellants herein…
-
Nagamma @ Nagarathna & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka
In the instant case, whether the motive projected and the crime has been proved and whether the circumstances lead to the culpability of the accused.
-
Maniklal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
Whether the High Court committed any error in bringing the case within the ambit of “attempt to commit murder” punishable u/s.307 IPC on the ground that the deceased-R died after a period of nine months from the date of…
-
Mohammad Afzal Mohammad Sharif v. The State of Maharashtra and Others
The complaint of the appellant before the High Court was that the police officers concerned had failed in their duty by not registering a First Information Report apropos the attack and assault on him by four…
-
Gurdeep Singh v. The State of Punjab
Issue arose whether the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant for the offences u/ss.307, 353, 332, 225, 186, and 120B IPC and s.25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the courts below was legally sustainable.
-
Ajwar v. Waseem and Another
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the impugned order passed by the High Court granting bail to respondent no.1-accused.
-
Kaushal Singh v. The State of Rajasthan
Matter pertains to the expunction of strictures passed by the High Court against the Judicial Officer.
-
Shiv Baran v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court quashing the summons issued against respondent u/s.319 CrPC by the trial court.
-
Vinod Bihari Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the applications filed u/s.482 Cr.PC by appellant for quashing the proceedings arising out of FIR u/s.2 and 3 of U.P. Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities…
-
Lal Mohd. & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Whether the prosecution of the appellants under the UP Gangsters Act satisfies the statutory thresholds prescribed under the Act, when it is based entirely on a single FIR, in which the appellants were already arrested…
-
Mohammed Asarudeen v. Union of India & Ors.
Whether the Special Court while dealing with an application under sub-section 2 of s.44 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 made in respect of a large number of witnesses, recorded the satifaction which is…
-
Aejaz Ahmad Sheikh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court by which the accused was acquitted of the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC.
-
Sachin v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether, the High Court could enhance the sentence under its revisional powers in a convict’s appeal against conviction.
-
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Raj Kumar Arora & Ors.
Issue arose whether an offence u/s.8(c) of the NDPS Act could be said to have been made out when an accused “deals with” psychotropic substances mentioned in the Schedule to the NDPS Act but not figuring in Schedule I…
-
Satbir Singh v. Rajesh Kumar and Others
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court whereby it set aside the order of the trial court summoning respondents as additional accused for facing trial along with the principal accused.
-
Suresh v. State Rep. By Inspector of Police
Whether the High Court was correct to uphold the conviction and life imprisonment granted by the Trial Court.
-
Abdul Wahid & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan
Whether it is for the prosecution to connect the accused to the alleged crime by producing credible and legally admissible evidence to punish.
-
Jitender @ Kalla v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.
I. Whether the Supreme Court decisions in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (I) and (II), which lay down the guidelines for the designation of senior advocates, require reconsideration. II. Whether an advocate on…
-
Naushey Ali & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Whether the present case is a fit case where proceedings could be quashed, particularly when Section 307, IPC inter alia was invoked and there was a settlement between the parties.
-
Ashok Saxena v. The State of Uttarakhand Etc.
Whether the High Court committed any error in holding the appellant guilty of the offence of murder.
-
Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh
In a case where the trial court relied upon the DNA report, whether the non-examination of the scientific experts involved in the process of conducting DNA profiling examination and issuing the report, led to the…
-
Goverdhan & Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh
The two accused-appellants and their father-the third accused, were convicted by the trial court u/s.302 r/w s.34 IPC for assaulting a person with deadly weapons causing his death. High Court upheld the conviction of…
-
Omi @ Omkar Rathore & Anr. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
Issue arose as regards summoning a person as accused for facing the trial, when the said person was named in the FIR but not chargesheeted.
-
Shambhu Debnath v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Whether the High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail to accused persons despite specific allegations of heinous crime u/s.302 of Penal Code, 1860 and chargesheet on record that established the allegations made…
-
Gurmeet Kaur v. Devender Gupta & Another
Issue arose whether the appellant while discharging her duty as a public servant on the relevant date, there was any excess in the discharge of the said duty which did not require the first respondent to take a prior…
-
Vishwajeet Kerba Masalkar v. State of Maharashtra
Whether the conviction of the appellant and the death sentence awarded for the alleged murders of his wife, daughter and mother were justified.
-
K. Bharthi Devi and Anr. v. State of Telangana and Anr.
Despite the dispute involved having predominantly overtures of a civil dispute and the matter having been compromised between the parties, whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the quashing petition filed…
-
Rama Devi v. The State of Bihar and Others
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the judgment of the trial court and acquitting the respondents of the charges punishable under Sections 302, 307, 333, 355 and 379, all read with Section 34 of the Penal…
-
Sunil @ Sonu Etc. v. State NCT of Delhi
Issue arose for consideration that as to whether the accused can be convicted for the offence punishable u/s.302 IPC or in the facts and circumstance of the case, the conviction needs to be altered to a lesser offence.
-
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramji Lal Sharma & Another
Matter pertains to the application filed by applicant seeking his release from further jail sentence, on the ground of his juvenility on the date of the offence and has already undergone a sentence of more than four…
-
K. Ravi v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
Matter pertains to the right of the accused to file a fresh application u/s.216 Cr.P.C. seeking his discharge after the charge is framed by the court, more particularly when his application seeking discharge u/s.227…
-
Raju and Another v. State of Uttarakhand
Whether the material on record unmistakably justifies the conviction of the appellant u/s. 307 IPC.
-
Shailendra Kumar Srivastava v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Ten persons were arrayed as accused and after investigation, a charge sheet was filed under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302 IPC alleging indiscriminate shooting and/or conspiracy leading to death of two persons and…
-
Vinod Jaswantray Vyas (Dead) Through Lrs v. The State of Gujarat
The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13.02.2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, whereby, the Division Bench partly accepted the appeal preferred by the appellant accused-A1 and…
-
Dharmendra Kumar @ Dhamma v. State of Madhya Pradesh
High Court if justified in upholding conviction and sentence of the appellant under ss. 302/34 IPC; the contradictions or discrepancies and the absence of blood group classification or inconclusive FSL results on the…
-
Surender Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Correctness of the order of the High Court upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant for offences under ss. 302 and 307 IPC .
-
Ajwar v. Waseem and Another
High Court, if justified in exercising jurisdiction u/s. 439(1) Cr.P.C for granting regular bail in favour of the accused persons.
-
Jadunath Singh v. Arving Kumar & Ors. Etc.
Criminal appeal filed by appellant Jadunath Singh against the Allahabad High Court’s decision to grant bail to Arvind Kumar, Chandra Kumar @ Chandu, and Rishi Kumar, who were convicted for life imprisonment under the…
-
Mukhtar Zaidi v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether CJM as also the High Court fell in error in taking cognizance u/s. 190(1)(b) Cr.P.C. inasmuch as the CJM had relied upon not only the Protest Petition which was supported by affidavit of the complainant but also…
-
Kirpal Singh v. State of Punjab
The appellant was convicted u/s. 302, s.307 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years respectively. Both sentences were to run concurrently. An appeal preferred by the…
-
Shivani Tyagi v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Matter pertains to suspension of sentence of life imprisonment of the convicted persons, and their consequential enlargement on bail, in an acid attack case.
-
Periyasamy v. The State Represented by the Inspector of Police
Whether the High Court justified in affirming the judgment of trial court convicting and sentencing the accused appellant, (A-1), for the offence punishable under sections 302 & 307 of Penal Code, 1860 and accused…
-
Naeem v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Conviction of the appellants-accused for offences punishable u/ss.302 and 34, Penal Code, 1860 based solely on the dying declaration, if justified.
-
Ram Singh v. The State of U.P.
As per PW-1-informant (son of the deceased), on the fateful evening when he and his brother were sitting in the open space in front of the entrance door of his house, his mother was sitting close by on a cot and some…
-
Mallappa & Ors. v. State of Karnataka
The trial Court acquitted appellants-accused nos.3, 4 and 5 for the commission of murder of one ‘M’. However, the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and held the appellants guilty of the commission of murder.…
-
Dattatraya v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting the appellant u/ss. 302 and 316 IPC and sentencing to undergo life imprisonment and 10 years of R.I. respectively along with fine, for causing death of his wife as…
-
Afjal Ansari v. State of UP
What are the parameters to be considered for the suspension of conviction u/s. 389(1) CrPC; whether the appellant has made out a prima facie case for the suspension of conviction u/s. 389(1) CrPC; and whether conviction…
-
Shashikant Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the prima facie ingredients of the offence punishable u/s. 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act were made out against the appellants.
-
Sivamani v. State Represented by Inspector of Police,
Victims sustained simple injuries. Whether Courts below were justified in convicting appellants u/s. 307 IPC.
-
Pawan Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
The question which arise for determination is whether the appellant was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence.
-
Sajeev v. State of Kerala
Whether the conviction and sentence of the accused-A10 and A11 u/ss. 302, 307, and 326/120B IPC and s.55(a ), (h), (i) and s. 57 (A)(1)(ii) of the Abkari Act by the courts below is sustainable in law.
-
Madan v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Six deaths were caused on account of brutal firing by the appellants and other accused persons. The trial court imposed sentence of capital punishment to the appellants (‘M’ and ‘S’) herein for the offence punishable…
-
State of Karnataka v. T. Naseer @ Nasir @ Thandiantavida
The High Court rejected the applications filed by the prosecution u/s. 311 of the Cr.P.C., seeking recall of PW-189 and to permit the prosecution to produce the report and the certificate u/s. 65B of the Evidence Act,…
-
Parshuram v. State of M.P.
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offences punishable u/s. 302/149, s.326/149, s.324/149, s.323/149, s.147 and s.148 IPC.
-
Anil Kumar v. The State of Kerala
Whether in the circumstances of the instant case, the appellant had any premeditated mind to kill the deceased or was it due to grave and sudden provocation which would not amount to murder or would at best be a case of…
-
Birbal Nath v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors
Whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the accused for the major offences u/ss. 302 and 307 IPC, and convicting them only for the offences u/ss. 147, 148, 323, 324, 325/149 and reducing their sentences to…
-
Abhishek Sharma v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
The victim-deceased gave four dying declarations. High Court confirmed the appellant’s conviction and sentence of life imprisonment u/s. 302 IPC as awarded by the trial Court.
-
Naresh @ Nehru v. State of Haryana
Conviction of the appellants for offences punishable u/s.302 r/w s.149, IPC based on the statement of PW-9, as an eyewitness to the crime, if justified. Evidence – Of eyewitness – When not to be relied upon: Held:…
-
Phulel Singh v. State of Harayana
Whether in the totality of the circumstances, it can be said that the dying declaration (Ex. P.L.) is free from doubt; whether evidence prove beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased was harassed on account of…
- Sunil v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Pramod Kumar Mishra v. The State of U.P.
-
Harendra Rai v. The State of Bihar and Ors.
In a murder case, the acquittal of respondent no.2 recorded by Trial Court and the High Court having been reversed and respondent no.2 having being convicted u/ss.302 and 307 IPC by the Supreme Court by an earlier…
-
Zunaid v. State of Up. & Ors.
CJM rejected the final report submitted by the investigating officer and accepted the Protest Petition as the Complaint Case, whether the course opted by the CJM was just, legal and proper in the facts and circumstances…
- Mukesh Singh v. The State (Nct of Delhi)
- Harendra Rai v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
- Dinganglung Gangmei v. Mutum Churamani Meetei
- Pritinder Singh @ Lovely v. The State of Punjab
- Raj Kumar @ Suman v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- Balwant Singh v. Union of India & Ors.
- Ansar Ahmad v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
- Ajai Alias Ajju Etc. Etc. v. The State of Uttar
- Sunil Saini & Ors. v. The State of Haryana & Ors.
- Jabir & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand
- Jaswant Singh & Ors v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr.
- Rajaram v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors
- Kalicharan & Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- B. A. Umesh v. Union of India & Ors.
- Ashok Kumar Singh Chandel v. State of U.P.
- Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- The State of Jharkhand v. Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai
- Sumitha Pradeep v. Arun Kumar C.K & Anr.
- Md. Jabbar Ali & Ors. v. The State of Assam
- Gurmail Singh & Anr v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Satish Chandra Yadav v. Union of India & Ors
- Yashpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr
- Mohammad Latief Magrey v. The Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
- P. Dharamaraj v. Shanmugam & Ors.
- The State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Phool Singh
- Munuwa @ Satish Etc. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
- Zakir Abdul Mirajkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- Khema @ Khem Chandra Etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Jai Prakash Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Honnaiah T.H. v. State of Karnataka and Others
- Daxaben v. The State of Gujarat & Ors.
- Prahlad v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.