IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. REV. No.1117 of 2010
SHEORAM PASWAN SON OF SITA RAM PASWAN
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KATHA P.S. BAROON
DISTRICT AURANGABAD.
...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
...Opposite party
-----------
03. 16.08.2010 Rule confined to the question of sentence only.
Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of
the State
With the consent of the parties, the application is
now being disposed of.
For an occurrence that had taken place on
15.11.1998, the petitioner was charge under sections 323 and
325 IPC. Allegation against the petitioner is that when the
informant saw 2-3 buffallows grazing his crops, he tried to drive
them away. This was protested by the accuseds whereafter it is
alleged that he was assaulted by means of Lathi on different
parts of his body (not on the vital part). The prosecution in order
to prove charge(s) examined five witnesses. P.W.1 is the
informant who is said to have received injury. P.W.5 is the
doctor who examined him of his injury. Considering the
materials on record including the evidence of the informant and
the doctor (P.W.5), learned trial court has found that the charge
under section 323 IPC has been proved beyond shadow of
reasonable doubts. He was accordingly convicted. So far as
section 325 IPC is concerned, the petitioner was acquitted of the
2
charge. Learned trial court on a consideration of the fact that he
was aged about 38 years and was not previously convicted and
the fact that the occurrence had taken place over trivial issue,
sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and
order of conviction, the petitioner preferred criminal appeal
being Cr.Appeal No.04/2003/53/2009 in the Court of Addl.
Sessions Judge IV, Aurangabad. The learned lower appellate
court re-appraised the evidence and came to the conclusion that
findings of guilt recorded by learned trial court do not warrant
any interference. Appeal was, thus, dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
admittedly the occurrence had taken place over a trivial issue. It
is stated that both parties are of the same village and are residing
adjacent to each other. It is next submitted that for about five
years the petitioner had to undergo the ordeal of trial which in
itself is a punishment as fighting litigation for a long time
definitely tells upon the mental and economical condition of the
litigant. It is thus contended that the petitioner deserves lessor
punishment.
Learned APP, on the other hand, supported the
impugned judgment. It is stated that there are concurrent
findings of guilt recorded by learned two courts below which
have not been shown to be perverse and/or perfunctory and, as
such, they do not merit any interference.
Having considered the submissions and after going
3
through materials on record, this Court is satisfied that
submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that
punishment, in the facts and circumstances of the case, seems to
be excessive has some force. Consequently, while maintaining
the conviction under section 323 IPC, the sentence so imposed
is reduced to R.I. for four months.
With this modification in sentence, the application is
dismissed.
( Kishore K. Mandal )
hr