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

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Bhawani Singh, J.
Madan Lal - Appellant
versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 1986
Decided on 3-4-1989
M.G. Chitkara and Mr. J.K. Verma, Advocate- For the Appellant.
L.S. Panta (D.A.G.)-For the Respondent.

IMPORTANT POINT
An offence under section 302, I.P.C. requires the same very factors to be proved as are needed to prove an offence under section 302, I.P.C. except the factum of death.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 307 Accused sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 500/- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 374 Convict appealed-Injuries caused neither imminently dangerous nor in vital part of the body-Intention or knowledge not clearly established-Injuries although many in numbers but simple in nature except injury No. 2 Evidence regarding period of hospitalization not on record-Whether the appellant rightly convicted under section 307, I.P.C.? (No) Appellant guilty of offence under section 324, IP.C. - Question of sentence-Appellant fined and also called upon to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the victim. (Paras 1, 19, 28 and 30 to 32)

       

JUDGMENT

Bhawani Singh, J. - The appellant, Madan Lal, feels aggrieved by the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Una, in Sessions Case No. 8 of 1985, Sessions Trial No. 6 of 1986. By this decision on 31-3-1986, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for additional term of six months.

2. The appellant challenges this judgment by way of this appeal.

3. Let the prosecution case be narrated briefly thus. The appellant was a private medical practitioner at. Badoohi Chowk in Una. Shattar-Din, complainant (P.W. 2), was a vegetable seller at the same place, occupying a khokha near a liquor vend and before leaving this place to his village, unsold vegetables used to be kept in this khokha by him. The appellant, the prosecution alleges, used to purchase vegetables from the complainant and on the day of the occurrence, the appellant owed Rs. 10.75 to the complainant towards the price of vegetables.

4. On February 19, 1985, the complainant came to open the shutter of the khokha at about 7 PM. The appellant was, at that time, standing before a liquor vend. At this time, the complainant, Shatter-Din, asked the appellant to pay him the amount in question. This enraged the appellant. The appellant, the prosecution alleges, felt insulted and asserted that he would teach a lesson to the complainant for insulting him. At this time, Shri Bal Krishan, an employee of the liquor vend, was present. The appellant left the place and the complainant, after closing his business, left for his house situated in the area of village Badoohi but in a different mohalla than that of the appellant although to some extent, the path was common.

5. The complainant was at a short distance from his village when the appellant met him and started giving him blows with a knife to teach the complainant a lesson for having demanded money in the open. A number of injuries were inflicted; the complainant sat there. On alarm, raised by the complainant, Kashmir Singh, Bishan Dass and Gharku, prosecution witnesses, appeared on the scene, witnessed the occurrence and rescued the complainant. Besides, followed by a few others the appellant ran away from the scene and after sometime when the complainant was taken to bus adda at Badoohi to be removed to the hospital, the appellant was detected by one Alla Bux with the help of torch light while coming from nearby khud carrying an attachi case and a knife. He was chased, caught and brought to the place where the complainant was kept and both were taken to the hospital at Una. Investigation started at the instance of the doctor at Una and ultimately a challan was submitted against the appellant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code which ended in the aforesaid conviction.

6. Before moving forward to discuss the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties; it is pertinent to mention the defence of the appellant. The same can be seen from his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the trend of cross- examination of the prosecution witnesses.

7. The defence of the appellant is that the case against him is false and the witnesses are deposing falsely because he is an outsider in the village.

8. As a matter of fact, the complainant had illicit relations with Jaina-Bibi, whom, the complainant used to bring to his residence for the purpose of treatment of her child, and one day while, it is alleged the complainant and the child were going down from the staircase of his house, some public men started assaulting the complainant. He being there, those men started assaulting him as well. He escaped and came to his house and fell unconscious due to injuries suffered there. After regaining consciousness, he found him self in Una Hospital being examined by a doctor. His attachi case was brought to Una, b

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top