2?? HIGH OOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUST!CE PRITI KER D! R cnAJvo. 722; 1995 APPELLANT Santosh Kumar Versus ‘ RESPONDENT State of Madhya Pradcsh Shri Ravi Knmar Bhagat, counsel for the appelhnt Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for the State. APPLICATION we 374 12) OF THE en;P.c.; JUDGMENT (31.03.2010) The present appeal is dimcted against the judgment dated 29.4.1995 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in ‘Session Trial No. 28/92 comicting the accused] appenant for'thc oEence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and hdf years. 2. Case of the prosecution in nut shell is that on 10.9.91, FIR EXP/2 was lodged by Ashok Kumar (P.W.-2) alleging in it that on the same day at about 9.40 a.m. when he was standing in nont of the clinic of DnFatnami (P.W.-6), accused/appellant mached there and stabbed him on his back as a nesult of which he sustained injuries. After investigau'on the police hied chalian against die accused/appellant and he was prosecuted for the oh‘ence punishable under Secu’ons 294, 506 Part II and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty the prosecution has examined eight witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. a x 4. Amr hearing the parties, the trial Court has acquitted the accuscd/appcllant for the omoe under Sech'on 506-3 65 294 of the IPC and convicted the accused/appellant for the oEencc under Section 324 of the IPC. Hence this appeal. 5. Counsel for the appellant submits that he is not messing this appeal as iar as it relates to convictbn part of the impugned judgment and would come his argument to the sentence part themof only. According to him at the relevant time, the appellant was young boy of 22 years and is now middle aged person of about 45 yeam, has lot of family responsibilities. He submits that the appellant has already remained in jail for about two months and 20 days, that‘the incident is said to have taken place on 10.9.91, / that the relation between the complainant and accused/appellant have again become cordial, no useful purpose would be served in sending him to jail and it would ’ be in the interest of justice if the sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him ‘To this, counsel for the State has no serious objection. 6. In View of above, the appeal is partly allowed. Conviction part of the impugned judgment is maintained. Appellant is reported to have remained in jail mr about two months and twenty days and therefore his sentence is reduced to the period already undergone by him. However, in lieu thereof, the hne of Rs. 5,000 is imposed upon the appellant and out of this amount Rs; 4,000 shall be gven to the complainant/vict‘m. If this amount of Rs. 4,000 is not paid to the complainant within a period of four months horn today, the sentence awarded by the Court below shall stand restored. Appeal thus partly succeeds. Sd/- % ker Diwaké‘vl‘ , ,2 pyltin Judge/2%; , \" \ \ \ x \ V v