1977 Supreme(Bom) 71
BOMBAY HIGH COURT (AT NAGPUR)
DIGHE AND KAMBLI, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 249 of 1975 with Criminal Appeal No. 250 of 1975,
Decided on : 12 -4 -1977.
The State of Maharashtra, Appellant
versus
Bodya Ramji Patil, Respondent.
V. V. Naik, Asstt. Govt. Pleader, for Appellant; R. S. Lambat (appointed), for Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code and the justification of the order releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct.
Headnote:
JUDGEMENT - S. 335 - [S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code] - The court discussed the applicability of S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code and found that the respondent had caused grievous hurt to the victim. However, the court held that the provocation given to the respondent was not grave and sudden, and therefore, the conviction under S. 335 was not justified. The court altered the conviction to S. 325 of the Indian Penal Code and maintained the order of releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct.
Fact of the Case:
Respondent Bodya was convicted of an offence under S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code for causing grievous hurt to the victim. The victim sustained a head injury and was admitted to the hospital for 23 days. The respondent was released on probation of good conduct by the trial court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent had caused grievous hurt to the victim, but the provocation given to the respondent was not grave and sudden, and therefore, the conviction under S. 335 was not justified. The court altered the conviction to S. 325 of the Indian Penal Code and maintained the order of releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provocation given to the respondent was not grave and sudden, and therefore, the conviction under S. 335 was not justified. The court altered the conviction to S. 325 of the Indian Penal Code and maintained the order of releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct.
Final Decision: The appeal filed by the State for enhancement of the sentence was dismissed. The order of conviction under S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code was altered to S. 325 of the Indian Penal Code, and the order of releasing the respondent on probation of good conduct was maintained.
KAMBLI, J:- Respondent Bodya alias Vanwas son of Ramji Patil, aged about 20 years (at the time of occurrence), resident of Saygaon in Tahsil Umred of District Nagpur, has been convicted by 4th Extra Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur, of an offence under S. 335 of the Indian Penal Code. Instead of sentencing him to any punishment, the learned Judge released the respondent after executing a personal bond of Rs. 500 with one surety in the like amount for a period of one year for keeping peace and be of good behaviour under S. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
2. Initially, the respondent was charged with an offence under S. 307, or in the alternative under S. 326 of the I.P.C. As he happened to be acquitted of these offences, the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 249 of 1975 against the acquittal of the respondent of those offences. The State has also preferred Criminal Appeal No. 250 of 1975 challenging the order of the learned Extra Assistant Sessions Judge, Nagpur, by which he released the respondent on probation on his personal bond with one surety under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, as stated above.
3. It is prayed in this appeal that the order of the learned Assistant Judge be set aside and sentence against the respondent may be enhanced suitably.
4. The respondent and Dama (P. W. 1) who is the victim of the incident, are residents of village Sayagaon. P. W. 1 Dama, P. W. 2 Doma, and P. W. 3 Bhaurao Raut under whom the respondent was serving at the material time are residents and cultivators of the village Sayagaon. The respondent was in service of Bhaurao Raut (P. W. 3) who was also known as Bhaurao Patil, since 7 to 8 months prior to the date of the incident which is 13-12-1972. On that day, P. W. 1 Dama, P. W. 2 Doma, the respondent in these appeals, and one Bhaurao Khati and one Vanwas Dodake had gone for bringing fuel from the jungle of Pulgaon in three bullock carts. Respondent had gone to bring fuel of his master P. W. 3 Bhaurao Patil, P. W. 2 Doma was bringing fuel for himself. After filling the bullock carts with the fuel, they were returning to the village at about 4 p. m. Respondent, P. W. 1 Dama and Bhaurao Khati were on the bullock cart of P. W. 3 Bhaurao Patil which was being driven by the respondent. These facts are not in dispute. It is the case of the prosecution that while the respondent, P. W. 1 Dama and others were so returning in their bullock carts, the respondent, Bhaurao Khati and P. W. 1 Dama were cutting jokes with each other and there was exchange of words between the respondent and P. W. 1 Dama. It is also the case of the prosecution, rather introduced at the trial, that the respondent was piercing iron nail (Tutari) to the bullocks and hence Dama (P. W. 1) was asking him not to pierce the iron nail to the bullocks. Over that there was exchange of words between him (Dama P. W. 1) and the respondent. The prosecution case further is that at about 4-30 p. m. the bullock carts came near the field of P. W. 3 Bhaurao Patil. At that time, respondent was driving the cart and Dama (P. W. 1) was sitting behind him. Both were abusing each other. Bhaurao Patil (P. W. 3), therefore, asked Dama (P. W. 1) to get down from the cart and asked the respondent to drive the cart. Dama (P. W. 1) accordingly got down. The respondent also got down from the cart with Ubhari a wooden rod inserted in the bullock cart to prevent the things or articles stored in the cart from falling down. After Dama (P. W. 1) and respondent got down, there was a scuffle between them. P. W. 2 Doma, P. W. 3 Bhaurao Patil and one Vanwas Dodake separated them. After they were so separated, respondent P. W. 1 Dama, P. W. 2 Dama and P. W. 3 Bhaurao Patil and Vanwas Dodake were going by the way towards the village. While they were so going suddenly the respondent Bodya gave a blow of Ubhari on the head of Dama as a result of which injury was caused to Dama on the left side of the skull. There was profu