Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2009 Supreme(SC) 40

2009(1) Supreme 154
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Lokeshwar Singh Panta and B. Sudershan Reddy, JJ.
Ramdas — Appellant
versus
State of Madhya Pradesh — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2009
[Arising Out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7738 of 2008]
Decided on : 13-01-2009

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :T.S. Doabia, Sr. Adv., Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Govind Goel, Sukesh Ghosh, Ambuj Agarwal, Kapil Hooda and C.D. Singh, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Where accused appellant had been proseucting case in different courts for last 14 years, sentence was reduced to period undergone by him to subserve interest of justice.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 307, 324 – Prosecution of appellant along with co-accused for inflicting a sickle blow on back of person of deceased in a heat of altercation – Death of injured after about 2 years of incident – Conviction of appellant u/s 307 IPC – Appeal – Partly allowed by High Court altering conviction to one u/s 324 IPC – Appeal -Testimony of eyewitnesses and perusal of FIR showed that on date of incident all of sudden altercation ensured between appellant and deceasedon issue of payment of Rs. 150/- as interest amount – No evidence on record to indicate that there was any previous enmity between appellant and deceased – No dispute that a single blow inflicted by appellant on back of deceased – Doctor conducting autopsy opined that deceased had not died due to direct result of injury inflicted by appellant – Appellant prosecuting case for more than 14 years in various courts and in that process underwent mental agony and financial sufferings – Sentence reduced to period already undergone by appellant to meet ends of justice – Appeal partly allowed. (Paras 13 to 16)
       Facts of the case :
       1.Appellant herein in the present case was convicted u/s 307 IPC for inflicting a sickle blow on deceased in a heat of altercation. High court on appeal altered conviction of appellant from one u/s 307 IPC to one u/s 324 IPC.
       2.Present appeal has been preferred against said order of High Court
       Findings of the Court :
       Testimony of eyewitnesses and perusal of FIR proved that on date of incident, all of a sudden altercation ensured between appellant and deceased on issue of payment of Rs. 150 as interest amount. There was no evidence on record to indicate that there was any previous enmity between appellant and deceased. There was no dispute that a Single blow of sickle had been inflicted by appellant on back of deceased. As per opinion of doctor conductingautopsy, deceased had not died due to direct result of injury inflicted by appellant. Since appellant had been prosecuting present case for more than 14 years, sentence was reduced to period undergone by appellant to subserve interest of justice.
       Result : Appeal allowed.

ORDER

Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. —

1.Delay condoned.

2.Special leave granted.

3.This appeal arises out of judgment dated 26.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior, whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the appellant has been partly allowed. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge of the High Court altered the conviction of the appellant from Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) to Section 324 IPC recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Morena, in Sessions Trial No. 190/1999 and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years instead of 7 years as imposed by the trial judge. Fine of Rs.2,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs.1,500/- was ordered to be paid to Smt. Shakuntla Bai (PW-4) widow of deceased Krishna Sharma, has not been interfered with.

4.The incident leading to the prosecution of the appellant occurred on 20.08.1994 at Village Purawas Khurd, Police Station Sihoniy, District Morena, Madhya Pradesh. According to the prosecution, one month prior to the day of the incident, Shri Krishna Sharma purchased a she-buffalo from appellant Ramdas for a consideration of Rs.5,000/-. It was agreed between the parties that the amount of consideration would be paid after birth of calf of she-buffalo. On 19.08.1994, calf of she-buffalo was born. On the day of incident, i.e. 20.08.1994, at about 10 a.m. Shri Krishna Sharma went to the house of the appellant for the payment of Rs.5,000/- where Sheetal Prasad co-accused was also present. The appellant made a demand of Rs. 150/- towards interest amount for which Shri Krishna Sharma did not agree because there was no such agreement between the parties to pay the interest of Rs.150/-. On this trivial issue, some altercation took place between the parties, as a result whereof the appellant dealt sickle blow on the back of the person of Shri Krishna Sharma. As a result of the said injury, blood started coming from the wound. The incident had been witnessed by Rajaram (PW-2), Ram Kishan (PW-3), Smt. Shakuntla Bai (PW-4) and Ram Swaroop (PW-5). After causing injury to the victim, the appellant and Sheetal Prasad both had fled from the scene of occurrence.

5.Shri Krishna Sharma, injured, lodged First Information Report under Sections 323/324/504/34 of IPC in the Police Station against the accused persons, on the basis of which the investigation was conducted by Lal Singh Yadav (PW-8) who recorded the statements of the witnesses, inspected the place of the occurrence and arrested the accused. Shri Krishna Sharma was medically examined by Dr. Jagdish Karkot (PW-7) on the same day who found following injuries on his person:

“One incised wound on the left side back of patient in the size of 1.4 cm x 2 mm x 1.3 cm.”

6.Injured Shri Krishna Sharma died on 01.07.1996 (near about 2 years after the incident). Therefore, Section 302 IPC was added in the chargesheet.

7.The learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the evidence, charge-sheeted the appellant and the co-accused Sheetal Prasad under Sections 302/34 IPC.

8.Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. In order to bring home the charges, prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses and placed on record relevant documentary evidence.

9.The learned Sessions Judge, on scrutiny of the entire evidence on record, held the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and, accordingly, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 1,500/- has been ordered to be paid to Smt. Shakuntla Bai (PW-4), widow of deceased Shri Krishna Sharma. However, no tangible and convincing evidence has been found against co-accused Sheetal Prasad, therefore, he was acquitted.

10.Being aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C’) before the High Court. The learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the appeal in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

2009 Supreme(SC) 40

2009(1) Supreme 154SUPREME COURT OF INDIALokeshwar Singh Panta and B. Sudershan Reddy, JJ.Ramdas — AppellantversusState of Madhya Pradesh — RespondentCriminal Appeal No. 47 of 2009[Arising Out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7738 of 2008]Decided on : 13-01-2009

IMPORTANT POINTWhere accused appellant had been proseucting case in different courts for last 14 years, sentence was reduced to period undergone by him to subserve interest of justice.

Judicial Analysis

2009(1) Supreme 154
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Lokeshwar Singh Panta and B. Sudershan Reddy, JJ.
Ramdas — Appellant
versus
State of Madhya Pradesh — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2009
[Arising Out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7738 of 2008]
Decided on : 13-01-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Where accused appellant had been proseucting case in different courts for last 14 years, sentence was reduced to period undergone by him to subserve interest of justice.