^^•:" ^S^S^ u HiOHCQUm-OF CHHATTISC3ARH AT Divssjon_Bench:- HON'BLE MR.T.P.SHARMA^ HON'BLE MR.R.N.Char.drakar, JJ. APPELLANTS (Sn JaiS) Crlminal Appeal No.12-28 of 2003 1. RamRumar S/o Mootohand Satnami, Aged 55 years, 2. Mahettarram S/o RamRumar Khunte, Aged34years, 3. Reshamtal S/o R8?Tikumar Satnaml, Agsd 20 yesrs, 4. Baratram S/o Agsd 24.years, Ramkumar Satnami, RESPOND&NT Ail R/o yillage Kudhari, P.S. Dabhra, Djstriot Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Dabhra Distt: Janjglr-Champa (C.G.) @ (CRMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTJON 374 OF THE PROCEDURE,1973) CODEOFCRirVIINAL Mr.Atul Pandey, counsei for the appeSlants. Mr.D.K.Gwalre; Government Advocate for the State/respondent (Passed on 11th July, 2011) PerT.P.Sharma.J.:- Chaliengs in thls appesl Is to the judgment of convictlon & order of sentence dated 31.10.2003 passed by the Additlonal Sesslons Judge, Saktl, in Sessions Triai No.160/2003, whereby & whereunder iearned Additlonai Sessions Judge after hoiding the appeSiants gulSty for tormat'ion of uniawful assembly having its common object to cause grievous tnjury to Arnar Prasad and simp'se injuries to Anujram & Brijmohan and in furtherance of common object of unlawfui assembty for causing such injuries armed with deadiy weapons convicted them under Sectjons 323/149, 325/149 and 148/149 of the i.P.C. and sentenced to i 5^.S.':-T^ i j v^^| j ^y ^' '%^'"' ^ c ^. undergo R.S. for three months, R.i. for two years and pay fjne of Rs.500/-, In defauit of payment of fine to further undergo R.i. for one month and R.i. for six months. 2. Convlctlon is impugned on the ground that without there belng any lota of evidence, the trlai Court has convicted and sentencsd the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed iliegality. 3. As per case of the prosecutlon, on 22.6.2002 at about 12 at night the appeilants entered into the house of Amar Prasad and others and after abusing them csused grievous hurt to Amar Prasad and simpie Injuries to Brijmohan and Anujram by using sticks. Amarprasad Satnami (PW-3) went to Poilce Statspn and iodged the F.I.R. vlde Ex.P/10. Spot map was prepared by Investigating officer vlde Ex.P/11. injured Brijmohan was sent for medlcal examlnatlon, he w@s examined by Dr.Goreiai Svllri (Pv'V-1) vids Ex.P/2 and found foilowsng injuries:- (i) Lacerated wound of 2 cm.x .6 cm. x .5 cm. In Seft clavlcie bone. (il) Abrasion with swslilng of 2 cm. x 2 cm. over isft hand. (lii) Contuslon of 5 cm. x 5 cm. over back of the head. (Iv) Bruises of 9 cm. x 1.5 cm. over back. (v) Bruises of 5 cm. 1.5 cm. In teft scapusar aspect. (vi) Brulses of3 cm. x2 cm. over back. (vli) Abrasion of 1.5 cm. 1.5 cm. over right hand. Injured Anujram was aiso examlned by Dr.Goreial JViirl (PVV-1) vlde Ex.PM andfound foilowlng injurtes:- (1) Lacerated wound with swelilng of 1 cm. x .4cm. x .5 cm. over right tiand. (li) Mlid sweliing of 3 cm. x 2.5 cm. over head. Dr.Gorela! Miri (PW-1) aiso examlned injured Amar Prasad vide Ex.P/6 and found folSowlng injuries:- (i) Lacerated Vv'ound with miid sweSllng of 3.5 cm. x 1 cm. x bone dsep wlth scaip. (li) Lacerated wound wlth swelllng of1cm. x .5 cm. x 1 cm. over Seft hand. ,/^^ "i<t •i' M '. ...... ''%' I'-'-'l.j @ (iii) Lacerated vvound with sv^elilng of 2.5 cm. x 1 cm. x 1 cm. over righthand. (iv) Bruises wlth sweiJlng of4cm. x 2 cm. over left hand. injured Amar Prasad was sent for radloiogica} examinstion and facture of u!na of Amar Prasad was found vlde Ex.P/8. StScks were seized from the accused persons. 4. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. and after compietion of investigatjon, charge sheet was fiied in the Court of Chief Judjcial Magistrate, Saktl, who in turn committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Biiaspur on the ground of counter case, from where the Additionai Sessions Judge, Sakti received the same on transferfortriaS. 5. In order to prove the guslt of the accused/appeilants, the prosecution has examlned as many as eight witnesses. Statements of the accused/appeilants were recorded under Section 313 of t'ne Cr.P.C., in wSilch they denied the circumstances appearing agalnst them and claimed innocsnce and false implication in the cnme in question. The accused persons have taken defence that the complainant perty has formed unlawful assembiy and In furtherance of common object of uniawfu! assembiy they have brutally murdered Gangaprasad, son of sppeiiant Ramkumar and csused injury to Ramkumar. The appeilants are reiatives and they have been falsely impiicated in crime in question. Counter case in Sesslons Triai No.406/2002 has been registered against five accused persons i.e. compiainant of the case and they have convicted and sentenced for commission of brutai murder of Gangaprasad and injuryto Ramkumar in Sesslons Triaj No.406/2002. 6. After affordlng opportunity of hearing to the parties, the Addltlonai Sesslons Judge has convlcted and sentencsd the appeliants as aforementioned. 7. We have heard Searned counse! for the parties, perused the judgment impugned and record of the triai Court. 8. Lesrnsd counseS for the appeiiants submlts that this is counter case in which Gangaprasad, son of appeiiant Ramkumar and appeifant ,\ •^ Ramkumar have recsived injuries as a result of such injuries and Gangaprassd died on the spot. Learned counsel further submits that on sccount of trifie dispute incident took ptace in which son of appeiiant Ramkumar nameiy Gangaprasad has tost his iife, they have not caused any injur^ to any of the compiainant. Learned counsel contended that considerlng the act attributed to the compialnant party who were five In number and who have committed murder of brother of appelSant Nos.2, 3 and 4 and son of appeiiant RamRumar and injuries to Amar Prasad, Brijmohan and Anujram, he is not disputing the fact that they have caused injuries but submits that they have caused the aforesaid injurtes in exerclse of right of private defence although they have slightty exceeded thelr right. VVhile awarding the sentence the Court below has not infiicted adequate sentence, therefore, sentence rsqulres reconsideration. 9. On the other hand, iearned State counseS supported the judgment impugned and submits that the Court beSow has awarded adequate sentence upon the appeiiants, although the appeiiants have not dlsputed the incident, their presence and injuries to compiainant party. Aforesaid facts are also estabiished by the evidence of Dr.GoreiaS Miri (PVv-1), injured Brujmohan (PW-2), Amarprasad Satnami (PW-3), Anujram Satnami (PW-4) and other witnesses. These are suffteient to estabiish the fsct that the present sppeiiants have commltted the offence punlshabie under Sections under Sections 323/149, 325/149 and 148/1490fthei.P.c. 10.As regards the question of sentence, definitely In the same incldent the accused party have iost thelr member i.e. Gangaprassd and appsilant RamRumar has aiso recesved Injuries, in these cjrcumstances, causlng Injury to compiasnsnt party by the appellants was not unnaturai; but while causing such injuries they have siightiy exeeeded the right of private defence. 11.Considering the aforesaid clrcumstances, jaiS sentence imposed upon the appe!iants wouSd not be proper. Consequently, the appeai is partiy ailowed. Whiie maintalnlng the conviction under Sections under Sections 323/14Q, 325/149 and 148/149 of the I.P.C., the appeilants are hereby sentenced of fine of Rs.2000/- under Sectlon 323/14Q of the i.P.C., flne of Rs.3000/- & tiil rising of the Court under Sectlon 325/149 of the I.P.C. and fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 148/149 ofthe i.P.C. The appeliants shaii deposit the fine amount withln 45 days from today. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge B/- Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge