The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that committing murder does not always require the use of a deadly weapon or an attack on vital body parts like the head.

In rejecting a murder accused's bail plea, the court noted that even safety shoes, when used as a weapon, can substantially increase the likelihood of causing serious or fatal injuries.

The bench of Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni was hearing a bail application involving a case where the deceased had attended a wedding with his daughter. During the event, while dancing, the accused placed his hand on the daughter's shoulder, which angered the deceased. In response, the deceased tried to remove his daughter from the gathering.

At that moment, the accused, wearing safety shoes, ran towards the deceased and delivered multiple blows and kicks to his stomach and private parts. The deceased was later taken to the hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries. Consequently, an FIR was filed against the accused, charging him with the murder of the deceased.

The accused argued that the postmortem report indicated the death was not caused by the blows and kicks but rather by surgical wounds, specifically septicemic shock resulting from peritoneum perforation. It was further contended that the accused's actions were driven by sudden provocation due to the deceased's anger towards his daughter, and there was no intent to cause the deceased's death.

The court rejected the arguments presented by the petitioner’s counsel, noting that the situation could not be deemed sudden provocation for the accused. Instead, it was the deceased who was attempting to take his daughter away after the accused touched her inappropriately. Furthermore, the court observed that the way the accused delivered blows and kicks while wearing safety shoes indicated an intention to cause the deceased’s death.

The court highlighted that safety shoes are typically made with hard, protective materials like metal toes or reinforced soles, effectively making them a weapon in this context.

Additionally, the court noted that the way the accused delivered blows and kicks while wearing safety shoes clearly demonstrated an intention to cause the deceased’s death. It emphasized that safety shoes are generally constructed with hard, protective materials, such as metal toes and reinforced soles, effectively making them a weapon in this instance.

In light of this analysis, the court determined that the accused had prima facie intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to the deceased by kicking him with safety shoes, fulfilling the mens rea requirement for murder. As a result, the court found the accused unsuitable for bail.

Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed.

Case Title: Vikas v State of Rajasthan & Anr.