HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
Criminal Appeal No. 599/1996
1. Phool Singh S/o Uttam
Singh aged 32 years.
2. Uttam Singh S/o Budh Singh
aged about 67 years
3. Hira Singh S/o Uttam Singh
aged about 24 years
4. Rajjan alias Udbad Singh
S/o Uttam Singh aged 26 years
All R/o village Golhi Mudia, PS Devendra
Nagar, Th. Devendra Nagar Dit.Panna MP
APPELLANTS
VERSUS
The State of Madhya Pradesh RESPONDENT
Shri Surendra Singh , Sr. Advocate with Shri Maneesh Mishra Adv.
for appellants.
Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
Judgment Reserved on 01.10.2010
Judgment Delivered on 05.10.2010
JUDGMENT
By feeling aggrieved from the judgment and conviction dated
14.3.1996 passed by Shri R.S. Rathor, Additional Sessions, Judge, Panna in
Sessions Trial No.68/93 in which appellants Phool Singh, Uttam Singh
and Heera Singh have been awarded sentence to R.I. for one year and
fine of Rs.500/- each in default 3 months’ rigorous imprisonment for the
offence u/s 323 IPC. Appellant no.4 Rajjan alias Adbad Singh has been
convicted for the offence u/s 323 and has been awarded sentence to R.I.
for one year and fine of Rs.500/- in default 3 months’ rigorous
imprisonment and u/s 325 of IPC and has been awarded sentence to R.I.
for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 3 months’ rigorous
imprisonment.
-2-
2. Briefly prosecution case is that on 25.7.1993, at about 7.00 p.m.,
Haridin (PW 2), Ghesitia (PW 3) and Tara Bai (PW 8) were picking
mangoes from the mango tree in the field. The appellants assaulted them
and caused simple injuries to Ghesitia (PW 3) and Tara Bai (PW 8) .
Haridin (PW 2), was beaten by appellant no.2 Uttam Singh, whose head
injury was found to be grievous.
3. Trial Court has converted the conviction u/s 325 IPC from 307/34
IPC.
4. Heard both the sides.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has not questioned the guilt. He
has only assailed his argument on the quantum of punishment.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that complainant
Harideen (PW 2) was examined by Dr. M.K. Naik (PW 7) who found
depressed wound measuring 3″ x ½” on the scalp/head strait in line with
other two minor bruises. Dr. M.K. Naik (PW 7) opined that this injury as
grievous in nature but this has been opined without any x-ray report etc.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that since
there was no fracture so by merely saying that the injury was dangerous is
of no essence and if the injury was dangerous to life the accused could
have been punished u/s 307 IPC not u/s 325 of IPC.
8. According to Section 320 of IPC, any hurt which endangers life or
which causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days in severe
bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits will be grievous hurt/
dangerous. But no fact has been proved that the complainant was unable
to work for more than twenty days, due to this injury so this injury will be
presumed to be only simple in nature.
9. Looking to the facts of the case I am of the view that the
complainant Harideen (PW 2) was also having simple injury and not
grievous one, so conviction u/s 325 IPC is not sustainable and I am in full
-3-
agreement with the learned counsel for the appellants that the conviction
of the appellant no.4 Rajjan alias Adbad Singh for the offence u/s 325 IPC
is not maintainable.
10 Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the
incident is of more than 17 years’ back and jail sentence may be more
harassment.
11. Looking to the circumstances of the case fine amount awarded to
the appellants is enhanced from Rs.500/to Rs.1,000/ each and they will
deposit Rs.500/- more. Each of the appellants will deposit Rs.500/-
more before the trial Court. Appellant no.4 Rajjan alias Adbad Singh will
further deposit Rs.1,000/- for the offence u/s 323 IPC on account of injury
caused to complainant Harideen (PW 2). On their depositing the amount
the imprisonment of jail sentence awarded to the appellants are set aside
against each of the appellants. They will deposit this amount within a
period of three months from today otherwise they will suffer S.I. for three
months in case of default. The appellants are on bail their bail bonds are
ordered to be discharged on the condition that they should deposit the
enhanced fine amount.
12. If amount is deposited by each of the appellants then Rs.500/-
each will be given to Haridin (PW 2), Ghesitia (PW 3) and Tara Bai (PW
8) as compensation u/s 357 Cr.P.C.
The appeal allowed in part.
(M.A.Siddiqui)
Judge.
Ag/