' ^R^t<^-^?* i-?.;-%^^ ~^y3SS • '.ys..^:^ '• ^ w^ i&c.slEriSii ^ V- '/'.- ::-' •Vif-^'S ......^ ?;'7-/ AcJ IN THE HI<3H COCTRT OF MADHYa PRADESH ATsJXBALEOR 53^ . Gri.Binal Xppeal No. ______-of3-9S 5 . APPBLIu'iNTS t 1) I^khurans-'S/o Bhag&?at Yadav,Aged-a-bou't-28yr{6 2) E'ekura'n S/o IShe.durain Yadav,Aged-aboat30yrs i 3) Sheduran 3/o Kartikrain Yadav,Aged".5Syrs. .-4) 'Aagaat.S/o Kattikram Yadav,a^ed~53 yrs. --A11 residentsof Vlltage-RaagaA, P.3.-tengali Distt.-Bilaspir-( ) 5) Baliram S/qKarfcikram Yadav, Ag^d~30yrs« ^" 6) Jannu 3/o Bhagela Aged-about-13 yr?« 7) Ohanriu 3/o Stagela Sged about-24 years — All re'sidents of village-Ohaupara P.S.-Hingali Distt.Bilas.pur (M.P.) v-Easus • . RESPOMOENTa s "Ihe State of dhya Pradesh CRZMENAL AFEEa.L, uNDER SEGTION 374 (2) OF THE CODS QP CRI!(!IN.U< paOCEEURS ; '.^- ;h ,:'b *¥' jll • i-ffrttff^iee? 'es asnE> ' ^'svs&{v-v-f*'sL • n^^SX QJLfSS£ 1.VS.E^.UUS9 S.t%»fS!if CR.A. HO. 1594,'199S versus Lekhuram &,0tb.ers State ofMadhva Pradesh Shri Suitil Sajiu, counsel for fhe a.ppeUants. Shri Vivek Siiarma. P.L. fer the State. .£' This appsal is du-ected against. fhe judginent and order da.ted 22,11.9.5 passed by tla.e IVth Additional Sessions Jiidge, L.ink Court; MungeU, District Bilaspur in SessionsTrial No. 87/90 convictmgthe accused/appellaats uilder Sections 148, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149 & 326/149 of the Indian Penal Code and seB.teacing each of thexu to iiiidergo rigoroiis anpasQniaeat for one yearwifb fine ofRs. 500, ia default of fine to furtfa.er undergo simple imprisoiijne.at for one monfh u/s^j.48; undergo RI for one yearwitli fiiie ofRs. 1000, m defaiilt of fiae to furfher undergo sunple im.prisoiunent f&i- three luonths i^/s. 323/149; undei^Q rigorous iaiprisoninent for'two.'years with fine| of Rs. 2000, in default of fiae to furfher uadergo siniple unpnsonip.ent fof six inonths y/s.324/149: iinaergp rigbrpus iinprisorunent^for three years witli iiue ofRs. 3,000,^^^^^i^ -'to furtherundergosiiaple imprisoffim.entforoneyearu/s. 3.25/ 149 & •^^_ .-.„:„__..-.^ ^_ _. _ _.: ^?^. IG fcigorous im.prisoiunela.t.for foyr yeara with fiiie of Rs. 4000, ia!, default-.jof fiiie to furfher undergo siiaple im.prisoninent fbx one year, U/S. 326/149 respectively:. ^.?-'2^,^/'Case'ofiCbeErpsecuton.Hi.b3-iefis at^^^^ ?l.&^"'%;2^'^a:svlodged-bv.orie.c}f:fhe:uyuj®d:ARain'IKuniaF^fiawa^ ""VS.iS1'!' •••':/~:"-' ^' . ' 1; ,1 •.'.:, ::. ;: '•.:^'.; .'• ''^'y: ^.V®|IBs;:s, ^.3ii;:alfegbig 1±iat'^tliat;day.:at about.'lG.QQ.g.im.w&en'K^ , • '..--hQt?! • akmg, with, Buddhu!: Raw%^(P.WBr^;^:>^sfa^il:|g;%|@),i!||^;: il'^ll^illiillffSliiitt^^^^i s'ii'K-'i ;^ €^ •^ '"?n&F!(S?' ^teiSaf altercatioa took place between Ashok & appeUant No.7 Dhaaiiu. Rawat. He has furfiier stated that despite lus intervention ttie quan-el could not be stopped arid accused persoas tried to assault thein whereupon he along with. Biiddhu Rawat and AshQk tried to escape. from the spot aad at that tiiae Dhaanu, Feku, Lekhu, Bhagwat, Khedu & Jaiuiu chased fhein by holding clubs except Dhannu who was holding axe, came towards tbein aad Dhaanu assaulted Rain Kuiiiar Rawat oa his head as a i-esult ofwhich he fefl dowri. aad fhen Feku, Khedu, Lekfau, Bhagwat, Jannu Ram assaulted him. with clubs. It is furtlier aUeged that Buddhu Rawat aiid Ashols: were also assaulted •witl'i axe and clubs as a result of which fhey suffered grievoxis injuries on their head. Based on tfais FIR. oflesce linder Sections 147,148,149 & 307 ofthe Iridian Penal Codewere registered agaiast the accused/appellants. After iavestigation., cliallan was filed on 8.12.89 by the police for the offences under Sections 147, 148,149 &307oftheIPC. ' •'t.S.S; 3. So as. to hold fhe accused persons guilty, prosecution has exainiaed as luaiiy as 15 witoesses ia support of its case. Stateinent of the accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Cnmiaal ProGedure in which fhev deided fhe charges leveUed against theiu and pleaded tlieir innocence and false im.plication t& the case. 4, After hearmg fhe parties, fhe tnal Court has convicted and seateaced the accused/appell'ants as inentioned above. 5; Heard counsel for the parti.es and perused the inaterial ~^"' .'..'•• .• • •• . ' ^ '•.•.. •• '.• • • . '.^ •• • • available ofi record iacludiag fh.e judglD.ent impugned. "t,:. .• . •• " ' . ' • . ' '' . • .."''•. -: ••" ' . 6,. •Coynsel for fhe appBIlaats submits that the appeUaats have .been'falsely im.pUcated 'and it is^ tbe coraplainaiit party who were the .aggTessor and while ttying to defend fheiaselves, soine iajuries Ttught 'have been caused'/by the appellants. He fiirther siibinits that the .-.Etemorand.utn.' aaQ. s.eizure witnesseS tiave not supported the .ease and tiave been deelared hostile. Lastly. if has been ^^^argueSJ:>v^.SIu-i:Satn}- thaf fhe; iaeident took place.ahciut gl'years back, mbst'of ftte'accused persorts hawe already reinaiited. tQJ''|ail &r » I! i I ': i i "^l F-!!l^'.,^. 1 VKwv^ % .// ~-ff ^:,,...s^ , , 'v"'SSB,:S:£Si'"'; . .'. ' . .. ^^-.- & ^ @ inore thansfae aiorifhs and therefore fheir sentence be reduced, to the periodalreadyundergonebytJiexa. ' 7. Gn the otherhaiid, supporting the impugned j'udgiaentit has been ai^ued by Shri Vivek SIiamia, counsel for the Sfate that the in.aiiner iawhich yictuns Raiu Kuiaar Rawat (P.W^.-8), BuBdIiu Rawat (P.W.-ll) & Ashok (P.W.-10) were assaiilted, makes it clear that all the accused persous have aotively taken part ui the iiicident. He further subiuits that fhe plea of self-defence is nof avaiiable to the accused/ appellaiits •because fhey have not' suffered. any iajuiy nor they have lodged. any report. He fiirtlier subniits fb.at apart&pm.fh.e stateinent of three iuj'ured. witaesses, one uidependent witness naiaely Naahaiya (P.'W,-12) fias atso supported the prosecutiori case. 8. Raju Yadav (P.W.-l) has nbt supported the prosecution case and has been declared iiostile.'Suresh Kuinar Yadav (P.W.-2) is the seizure wituess ofEx.P/2 to P/5 by which plain soil and blood staiued sofl and soine ctothes ofdie iajufed Raiu Kuinar, Buddhu Rawat & Ashokwere seized,:ha.s supported tlie prosecuuon case. GoTikaTan Prasad Sahu (P.W.-3) is the Patwari wfco prepared the spot map (Ex.P/6): Dr. A.K.Saayal (P.W.-4) is the wimess who had inedieally exaiiiiaed fhe victiia.Ram. Kiunar (P.W.-8) and given his report Ex.P/7, Iias'ab'ticed foUpwiiig injuiies on his.bodv: i) LaceraiEd wound .on Eead 6cm:. above nght eye in tlie sizeof5xlcm..xdeeptpbone, , u) Contusionon.leftshoulderinthesizeof2x2 cms. ni) ContasioD.pn left hand 5 cin. below left elbow joiiif in the Size.cif'6x 2ci.as. '"'- 'l'::' .. ':1 .' ; iyj -• .(Sohtu.sion oa. right liand. 7 cins. below elbow joint ia tbe ..?'' ;' '. : size of'7x2 % a^. \ . . '. ' : ' ' : . . • ':'.: " ' . y) ^ . Contusion on-back below rigUt scapula in fbesize df5 1/2 x-3 ciiis. • - vi)' Coa'T.usion on back niedial to rigtit scapu]ar region ia tiie •-••;' .: . •size:of4x3cxiis.':'^;,'::,.':'—- .' • ::; : -" . .^,^?vii)^.. 'Contusion cut inifidle pf liigli laedial poifioa fenderaess .^...^.S.^'v,'"'•" ;..•••• . : : ::: ,'•'•":':' .: •' ~V . . ::-^:. l'»'ns«%~!' '-c'itt;in.fh.esizeof7x'2.%.cias.'; . .. :.: ': |.::; ',:'^;'./ :\ viu): ^t^ntusion on rigKt anlsle ioiatui the size of3 x 3.cias.; ;WW 'aK "'••»>\ VK ^' @ He had also examiaed the vietiin Budhu Rain (P.W.-ll) and given his report Ex.P/8, Itas noticed fqllowin.g injurie.s on liis body: ; i) Contiisionabove right e^ebrow itt fheaze of4x tl&eins. ii) Lacerated wound cut 7 cm. above riglit wristjomt in tlie sizeof 2x1x1 cins. . ; iu) LaGerated wouitd beldw nght elbow joint in. fhe size of2 x 1 cin.,' : : ,,'••;, ; / iv) Contusion OB. left side^of chest S cm.. 'below^let mpple ni .the^size cS3.^~:eia:.^i'.'^''::::'- i',:'^ ' ,•',.; • ^. 1 v) LaGeratetl wouiid EigW'teinpoi^ ^gionSc right ear ia.:.t&e size^of,2 •% x.1 cin. x deep fb bone. , , ; yi) incised wound cut 5cin. above }eft eye in tlie size of5 xlxdeep totxSnc vii) Incised woiuid cut 3em. above and medial t6 inji.uy No.5 ia fhe size 6f6 x Ixdeepto'bope. vin) ' Lacerated wound cut 3cin. above Hijuiy No.6 in. the size •of7x2xdeeptobone ! Saiulari^.he had also exasiiaed inju^ Asliok Kuiaar (P.W.- 10) and giyen his report Ex.P/9, llas noticed foUowiug iiyi-u-ies on his bodv: ' : : • ; '• .:-~:''.•':; . :' ;.. ''•.' •;- i) Laceraffid wound base of left uidex fiager in. the size of 2 % cmx Vt cm. x %cm. iil Laceratedwound cutletfootonSl'iiftoftibiaia.fhesize of'2x1x1. cm...' , '^ : . .^ ' •1 : '..•. :: . ! . • •' /: 1"' , ^ iuj Lacerated wciund. 7Gin. aboye ngtit eye on liead.i.n the., ./ size of6x3cai. x'.deeri'to bone ';, ', . . , •/'~ '.~~~:~':~.l~'~—'-^^7'''''!''~:.~'S:-^''.'w?'^ .;1:'.''..... ^/ '' ;is)^ .: Lacerafed'weiuiid^oii.iiead;,8..Gm,.^cnre',lefteye,iafhe-size^ •^., ; \ •'.'."/•;.' •'"'•-•'.'••".",' ''.''-'":"'''•'^..: ":.'-'"/'"'•'• ^;;: :''••'••'•::-•.•'• '•'' "":••"•'•''. .' ••-'-.'..("••:..:.••..',. '' of 6cia.x3efeiKdeep.lto:l:>orie .^ • . ' ; . ••:~^u^ . Lacerafed~wouiul,toacfe;'6ftefteaTia^fhe-s x i'a x '.' :deep;to.boiie- :':'';;^^,';.,;../i..,•..,• 3y::?; ..•':'-,?]::'~: :: ' ^ vi^ ' LaGei;ated'w6'uIu3;®a..,leS:^ear.m..tfae:si^'^of2;:S(^^%^Gj]a.. ,i,.s .,..:-^ ':: vii) ' __,'Eaceraled.: wotmiffi OB:..l£sft^ea.r?piana'cuteont!tu^ffie^sizgt;o¥? S'^\:' .-^: '; : ^2.cillS. 1- .:^::,:::':.,:;'.:!'.11:,: .c': . '1 • :S5' ''::, : ; ^s^:::fe;::^% illil \. viiA^' :'£A3BXusion^su^.@: it^^:lieffi.:'side»f,tea3j^oi^ •si:wiof7;x4c::m.s.:%^'''.. ;::'.',?'^/:;'''.'^,: -"^." . ;i?egiiQK2i:Et';'thjE£ < •.•..-^'.agt';".;,. ^9"S •^. Accordiag to this witaess, fhe injuiy No.7 susfained by injured AsBok was erievous ia na.ture. He has ftu-ther stafed that he had advised'BufUiu Rawat {P.W.-ll) 85 Ashok (P.W.-10) for x-ray as fbe injuj'y No.7 sustaiaed tey Asliols was gnevous iii na.tuFe. He has also stated fhat f&e iiijuries sustained by tfae vicfuns.imght have been caused to •fhem. by (liJferemt^Swga^oii.s which were seized fimtn the accused persons aad in paiaSyoSIus cross examination, he has given. the descripfk>n_ of fhe saiue. .Mo&aiii is fhe witness of ttte ineiDorandiua aad seizuie, has B.dt supported tlie prosecution case. Oan.garaia Dhurve (P.W.-6) is ttie Ifivestigafiag Officer has duly supported the prosecution case. Rajkuinar (P.W.-7) Kofwar is fhe witness of seizure of Ex.P/9 to E.x.P/24, has duly Supported the prosecutloacase. . 9. Rain KuinEQ- (P,.W.-8) •lodgeroffhe FIR and the tnjui-ed, while supportmg fais case has stated that on the date of ineident, Ashote (P.W.-10) aiid'Budhuraiii (P.W.-ll) were brutallv assaulted by fhe aecused persons. He bas sfated ffaat soine viBagers tried to latervene but despite tliat fhe accused persQns assaulted thein by ineaas of axe aiid clubs. Tliis witness was yeiv firm aad has nof slated any such thiag which inay help ttie aGcused/appeIiant. I.ialai'aiD. (P.W.-9) lias parfly supported the'-prosecutioQ case aad has stated f&at he saw the accused/appeBants ruriniag aad .when he asEed as fo what had happened, fhen accused Bhagwat told him that some quairel had taken place, at fhat tune he saw accusedyappeUaat holdang axe ia hte 'hand and other acGuged. persons weic hdldiag laliu wilif ^hein. and fhereafter thia witnesswas deelared^tiostile, AsUok (P.W.-I01 anofher /. :' ' : \'^ '• • :^'' '^'^': ' ^.:' : • •-": :::':: •i. • '• victiiu, ^whUe supportuig tte' p^ lia.s stated (hat 1 aecuse!l BaU assaultedjHm tiy axe aad other aceused'Dei-sons Lekhu :"; ..' .. '••'... • ' -'.:;-' •'. '. " •;:...''-."'.' •" 'L'.'-'. . ..•'. ";''.: - ."&, Fieku assaulted lumwith ctubs. ' Similar is fhe position wifh Budhu Rain (P.W.-Il) a^ iajiired, eyewitness wto^ te ;,,'^ _.^<£'•.,..... .^i:\:":'.; .i:..';:^'El:e.1. laceuse&personsi, Nanlia3ya(B.^-12)^^ llas; K^o'^:'categorica]]y';;'Stated^.':^\^ •wBa.t::^:;;;itiaaaeT:^'^1:hef; ^\acGused^^peIiaiits:have::^ssaaltedffi Assistaa^Sub;[nspectQFi}:ias,(ic)ne':f):ie,part^QfinvesS^^ •^ -S} ^' :^ aud supBOrted the case of ffae prosecution. D.P.Paiidey (P.W.-14) is fhe Naib Tahsildarwho recorded the dyiag declara.tioii Ex.D/1 A of Raiu Kuinar. Dr.C.S.Shai?ua (P-W.-15) is the radiologist, had done x- ray of Budhuram. and Ashofc aad feitiad fractiu-e 6n fhe parietal bone ofskuU & fcactuie bfriglitfbreariit(Ex.E/31).He had ateo dane tbe x- ray of AsholE and his i^ott is'Ex.P/34 and fouiui^ f^^ parietaibone and Iractuic Ofleffmiid.cIleaaEtiiidexfiagerofljefthaad. 10. Miaute examinadkiu of tbe eyfilence offhe witaiesses niakBS it clear that oa the-date of incideiif, i.e. IQ.10.89, aU fhe accused person taok active part in assaultin^ Ram Kum^ BudIuiSs Ashok. The lEiedical report offhe victims also aupports flie prosgcution case and fherefore the conyiction of fhe accused/appeUants is in accordan.cc with lawaad no iaterferencecaa be caUed for. II. Counsel for.fhe accTised/appeBaiits subniits that ftieir relations have restored tp noniLalcy, fhe.iacident had taken place about 21 years back and the a.ppeliants are ready to reasonably coiapensatefh.e victims. He furflier^subiiuts fhat fhe appeltauts Iiave iciaauied iiijailfermorefhait-sixinonfhs^a^ fherefbre jid useful purpbse would be setved iu seiiduig tbem tojafl aafl it woi^ the aiterest of justice if fheir seateaGe is reduced to the period already Tindeigone by;:theia. However, he subiuits that fhe sentence of fine inay be erLKaiiced so fhat t&e wictu&s are cpnipensated. 12. Ori the other haad, cdunselfer tfae State submits that apart . fi6ni mjured Rani Kumar & Budliuraai, AsJiok hassuffired. grievous injury aud thafeaU the uijuries sustaiued by fhcia hawe been duiy \proyedby.£)i-.A.K.Sanyal(P.W.-4). . • •_._- .. 'it*. • : .. : :'', . ' . :^ 'S ,13. .Hswm.g bfiard cpunselY :for_ the parties, accordiag';to fhe consMered-opiiupQ bftlus Gour^^^hs^coiiyiction part'oft^ ~ caruiot fce disturbed. Aceordia^, fb& coir^tion^^^i^^ --; '';IPC. is niaixltairied, So; •far as'1 eoii^fion unde^ SeGMons 14-8, . ^23^149; 324/149, 325^i49.of^the IPG'are eoHCimied, tfi^^ia^ ^''^Samtained^, • . ; : '- ' !. ::::.:;' ' : •.::; . : ::,.''.' • :,'•• ::::';:' S'::^: use ;^sft^^^!'i]S^^!^s'-"-"i;dB&i I; i i 1 ^ 14. As regards senteace; lookiiig to fhe fact th.at the iticideut had taken plaGe about 21 years ago, fhat tiie a.ccused/appellants l fo 6 have atready luidergpne about six ttionftis ofjail sentence &:appenaat Np.7 about niae raonfhs aad ftiat fhe rtlation betweeri.theinha.ye becoiue nQrmal as they belong tb saine village, ict the peculiar facls and circuinstances ofthe case, tfais eourt is of the view that it would be in fhc toterest bf justice if the jail seateuce iiuppsed on the accused/appeUants is reduced to ttte pertod already uad.eigcfc •" bv fhem. subjecf to ertb.aucement ofseatence offine. 15. Accordingly, tlie appeal is partly aUowed. Jail sentence iinposed oh fbe appellairts is hereby reduced to fhe period already undeigone by fliein. However, ea.ch offhe appeUant is directect to pay fiiie ofRs. 5,000 in addition to the fiae amount iinposed by tKe trial Cozut. Out offhisfotalamQuntofRs. 35,000, .Rs. 10,000 would be given to Ram. Kumar. Rs. ?IO,OOQ~ to'Budhuram. & Rs. ^ to Ashok. The appellaats are diirected to deposit t6e ad(lttionat fihe aiaourit befere the trial Court wif&ia a period of sjx inonths &om the date dfreceipt ofcopy ofthis order aad in turu'the trial Coiut ahaU di^urse t^ same to the victims. If the appellauts fail t6 deposit the saine witfaiii the sttpulafed period they shaU b& liable to undergQ further rigorous imprisoimifiatofQneyEar. . , . ' ' Appeal thus gartiy succeeds. Sd'. Pritinker Diwaki'r Jadge ,/h '^.. •'•V. 't?t;-?,- •"