Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1311 (MP)

Bhagwan Singh and two Others v. State of M. P.

2009-11-26

SUSHMA SHRIVASTAVA

body2009
JUDGMENT : Sushma Shrivastava , J.: -- Applicantshave preferred this revision against the appellate judgment dated 23.12.06passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Sehore inCriminal Appeal No. 117/06 arising out of the judgment dated 07.08.06 passed byJudicial Magistrate First Class, Sehore (Camp Ichchhawar ) in Criminal Case No. 120/04. 2.Applicants were tried for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324/34, 325/34and 506 Part II of IPC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sehore ( Camp Ichchhawar ). As perprosecution allegations, on 14.12.03 about 3 o’clock in the noon atvillage Avalikheda when complainant Nannulal was in his field, applicant Bhagwan Singh came there and asked him not to go through his field and thereafter beganassaulting him by an axe. On his shouting for help, complainant’s son Santosh came there, then applicant Bhagwan Singh and other applicants began assaulting his son Santosh .Thereafter all the applicants again assaulted complainant Nannulal and did not allow him to escape; as a result both complainant Nannulal and his son sustained several injuries. The FIR ofthe incident was lodged at Police Station Bilkisganj ,District Sehore , on the basis of which an offence wasregistered against the applicants and was investigated. After dueinvestigation, applicants were prosecuted under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325/34and 506 Part-II of IPC. 3.After trial, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, (Camp Ichchhawar ) Sehore , acquitted the applicants of the charges underSections 341, 506 Part-II of IPC, but found them guilty under Sections 325/34and 323/34 of IPC for causing grievous hurt to Nannulal and simple hurt to his son Santosh respectively,sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.200/- forthe offence under Section 325/34 of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for sixmonths for the offence under Section 323/34 of IPC, also found applicant Bahgwan Singh guilty under Section 324 of IPC and sentencedhim to rigorous imprisonment for two years by judgment dated 7.08.06 passed inCriminal Case No. 120/04. 4.In Criminal Appeal preferred by the applicants against the aforesaid order oftheir conviction and sentence, the Appellate Court, after considering theevidence on record, came to hold that offence of causing grievous hurt tocomplainant Nannulal by the applicants was not provedin absence of due proof of X-ray report, but found them guilty only for causingsimple hurt to complainant Nannulal , therefore,setting aside their conviction and sentence under Section 325/34 of IPC heldthem guilty under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced each of them to a fine ofRs.1000/-, also set aside the impugned sentence of imprisonment awarded to theapplicants under Section 323/34 of IPC, instead sentenced each of them to afine of Rs.1000/- under Section 323 of IPC for causing hurt to Santosh ; also affirmed the conviction of applicant Bhagwan Singh under Section 324 of IPC, but modified andreduced his sentence to rigorous imprisonment for one year by the impugnedjudgment, which has been assailed in this revision. 5.Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the Courts below gravelyerred in law and facts in convicting and sentencing the applicants, though nocase was duly proved against the applicants. 6.Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, justified and supported theimpugned judgment. 7.Impugned judgment and records of the lower Courts perused. 8.There is a concurrent finding of fact of two Courts below that applicant Bhagwan Singh caused hurt to Nannulal by means of an axe, a sharp edged weapon. The aforesaid finding of fact doesnot suffer from any infirmity in view of the evidence of complainant Nannulal (P.W-1) coupled with the evidence of his son Santosh (P.W-2) and the medical evidence of Dr. B.K. Chaturvedi (P.W-8). Similarly no infirmity is found in thefinding of fact recorded by the two Courts below about causing hurt tocomplainant Nannulal as well as to Santosh by the applicants, for which there was ampleevidence on record. Thus, in view of the evidence available on record and thefindings recorded by Courts below, the conviction of applicant Bhagwan Singh under Section 324 of IPC and the convictionof all the three applicants under Section 323 of IPC on two counts for causinghurt to Nannulal and Santosh ,does not suffer from any factual or legal infirmity so as to warrant anyinterference in revision. 9.As regards the sentence, the sentence of fine of Rs.1,000/- awarded to theapplicants under Section 323 of IPC on two counts for causing hurt to Nannulal and Santosh , does notcall for any interference in the facts and circumstances of the case. Learnedcounsel for the applicants, however, strenuously urged that the incident of thecase occurred on 14.12.03 and applicant Bhagwan Singhhas also settled in life, he has also undergone imprisonment for one month andtwenty-seven days, i.e. nearly for two months, and the sentence of imprisonmentis also not mandatory for the offence under Section 324 of IPC; it was,therefore, submitted that the impugned sentence of imprisonment awarded toapplicant Bhagwan Singh be modified and reduced tothe period already undergone by him and some fine may also be imposed. 10.Considering the submissions as advanced and the facts and circumstances of thecase, including the fact that the incident of the case occurred around sixyears back in the year 2003 and applicant Bhagwan Singh has already suffered imprisonment nearly for two months, interest ofjustice would be sub-served, the impugned sentence of imprisonment awarded toapplicant No.1 Bhagwan Singh under Section 324 of IPCis modified and reduced to the period already undergone by him, but applicantif the impugned sentence of imprisonment awarded to him under Section 324 ofIPC is modified and reduced to the period already undergone by him and a fineof Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand only) be imposed on him. 11.Accordingly, the conviction of applicant Bhagwan Singh under Section 324 of IPC as well as conviction of all the threeapplicants under Section 323 of IPC on two counts are maintained. Thesentence of fine imposed on the applicants for the offence under Section 323 ofIPC on two Counts is also maintained. However Bhagwan Singh shall also pay a fine of Rs.5000/- (rupees five thousand only) to bedeposited by him within three months from today, failing which he shall suffersimple imprisonment for three months. 12.The amount of fine of Rs.5000/-, if realised , shallbe paid to injured Nannulal as compensation forinjuries caused to him. Revision stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.