SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Bom) 725

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
V.M. Deshpande, J.
Jhamsingh - Appellant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No. 73 of 2019
Decided On : 27-03-2019

Advocates Appeared:
M.V. Ghatge, Adv., S.Y. Mahajan, Adv.

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 428 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 307 – Order of conviction – By the present Revision Application, the Applicant is challenging the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, in Sessions Case – By the said, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, convicted the Applicant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and directed him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine amount of Rs.1000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Learned trial Court also granted set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. – Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment and order of conviction, the Applicant preferred the appeal before the Sessions Judge, and it was registered as Criminal Appeal – Sessions Judge, dismissed the appeal and took the Applicant into custody to suffer the sentence. – Against these, the present Revision Application is filed. – Held, Intention or mens rea is a mental process. – It is always locked in the mind of the accused. – The intention can be gathered from the attending circumstances. – In the present case, while making assault on the injured, the Applicant chose a heavy sword, not only that, he gave repeated blows on the person of the injured. – These cumulatively can safely allow the Court to reach to the conclusion that the Applicant was having intention to commit murder of the injured. – Insofar as reduction of sentence on the ground of age of the Applicant is concerned, in my view, the age of the accused alone cannot be mitigating factor to decide the quantum of sentence. – Here, in this case from the medical evidence as available on record, it is clear that only with the grace of God the precious life of injured is saved. – After giving first blow of sword, the accused did not stop, he continued the said process. – In fact the Court below had already shown leniency by imposing punishment of seven years only, warranting no further leniency from this Court. – After perusal of the impugned Judgments by both the Courts below, and after hearing the learned counsel for the Applicant, he could not point out any perversity in any of the Judgments delivered by the Courts below. – In my view, the Courts below were right in returning the finding of guilt against the Applicant. – Consequently, there is no merit in the Revision Application. – Revision Application Dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

V.M. Deshpande, J.

This Revision Application was listed on 7 th March, 2019. On the said date notice was issued to the Respondent State and learned Additional Public Prosecutor waived the service. Record and Proceedings were called, consequently the same are received.

2. Today, this Revision Application is listed for admission. The Record and Proceedings is also placed before me for consideration.

3. After hearing Shri, M.V. Ghatge, the learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr. S.Y. Mahajan, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, with their consent, Rule is issued and is made returnable forthwith.

4. By the present Revision Application, the Applicant is challenging the Judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Nanded on 9th February, 2012 in Sessions Case No.60 of 2010. By the said, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Nanded, convicted the Applicant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and directed him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine amount of Rs.1000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Learned trial Court also granted set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

5. Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment and order of conviction, the Applicant preferred the appeal before the Sessions Judge, Nanded, and it was registered as Criminal Appeal No.19 of 2012. On 6th February, 2019, the learned Sessions Judge, Nanded, dismissed the appeal and took the Applicant into custody to suffer the sentence. Against these, the present Revision Application is filed.

6. The prosecution case, as it was unfolded during the course of the trial, can be narrated succinctly, as under;-

(A) In the year 2009, Sayyed Azam Sayyed Yousuf (PW-16) was attached to police station Itwara of Nanded. On 11th December, 2009, when he was discharging his duties in the said police station, a telephonic information about Medico-Legal Case from the hospital was received. Upon getting such information, he immediately rushed to the Government hospital. There, he recorded statement of Jagjitsingh Khalsa (PW-1). The statement recorded is at Exhibit-35. On the basis of said, he registered an offence vide C.R. No.140 of 2009, for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The printed First Information Report is at Exhibit-66.

(B) As per the oral statement of Jagjitsingh (PW-1), prior to two years, he purchased half portion of plot from Applicant - Jhamsingh, situated at Abchalnagar of Nanded and thereafter he carried construction thereon. Prior to one month of the incident, he gave Rs.4,00,000/- to the Applicant - Jhamsingh, who executed an agreement for selling remaining half portion of the land. Inspite of said, it was learnt by Jagjitsingh that, Jhamsingh/Applicant is intending to dispose of the property, therefore, he filed civil suit and obtained the injunction. According to the report of Jagjitsingh (PW-1), due to the said, the Applicant got annoyed and on 11th December, 2009, at 8.15 a.m., the Applicant entered the plot along with sword and assaulted repeatedly, resulting into suffering various injuries. The First Information Report states that the incident was seen by Kulwantsingh and others, thereafter the Applicant ran away from the spot. It is also stated in the report that, Kulwantsingh put the first informant into auto rickshaw and brought to the Government Hospital, Nanded.

(C) After the registration of crime, PW-16 Sayyed Azam visited the spot and prepared spot panchnama in presence of panchas. Spot panchnama is at Exhibit-61. He also recorded statement of witnesses. The Investigating Officer also seized clothes of the complainant under seizure panchnama (Exhibit-69). He caused arrest of the Applicant under arrest panchnama (Exhibit-70). Sword was also seized from the Applicant under seizure panchnama (Exhibit-40). During the custodia














































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top