Back
2003 Supreme(Pat) 748
PATNA HIGH COURT
Indu Prabha Singh, J.
Sadhu Yadav
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Appeal No. 365 of 1991 ;
Decided On : JULY 23, 2003
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the appellant's intent and the nature of the injuries in determining the appropriate charges and sentencing.
Headnote:
Section 307 - Conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act - Summary of Acts and Sections: Indian Penal Code, Section 307; Arms Act, Section 27
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act for causing injuries to the informant. The prosecution's case was supported by witnesses and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's actions did not demonstrate an intention to kill the informant, leading to a conviction under Section 324 of the IPC instead of Section 307. The conviction under Section 27 of the Arms Act was maintained.
Issues: The issues revolved around the appellant's intent to cause harm and the appropriate charges under the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the injuries, the appellant's actions, and the circumstances of the case to determine the appropriate charges and sentencing.
Final Decision: The appellant's sentence was reduced to the period already undergone with a fine, and the appeal was dismissed with modifications.
INDU PRABHA SINGH, J.
1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years. He was further convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution case, as per the fardbeyan of the informant Dharmanedra Kumar, is that on 18.4.1946 at about 5 a.m. while the informant along with his cousin Sanjay Kumar and villager Narayan Singh had gone to bring Cucumber [kakari] from his field, known as Ashrafchak Khandha, all of a sudden the appellant Sadhu Yadav came there and gave a lathi blow in the left leg of the informant. The informant, sustaining lathi injury, started fleeing away and when went at some distance then the appellant Sadhu Yadav fired a pistol upon the informant which caused injuries in the right thigh of the informant. Thereafter, the witnesses Sanjay Kumar and Narayan Singh, who were also present in the field brought him near the Khandha and thereafter with the help of the witnesses he came to the police station, where the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded. The cause of occurrence has been disclosed that one week prior to the occurrence, the appellant Sadhu Yadav wanted to cross through the grains of the informant which was kept in his khalihan. When he was objected, the appellant threatened him of dire consequences and due to the same the occurrence took place. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, the formal FIR was registered in Bind Police Station under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the appellant and accordingly cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial. Ultimately, trial concluded with the result as indicated above. The appellant pleaded not guilty and stated that he had been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity.
3. The prosecution, in support of its case, has examined altogether seven witnesses. PW 1 is Pinku Kumar PW 2 is Sanjay Kumar. He is cousin brother of the informant, PW 3 is Dharmendra Kumar, the informant-injured of the case. PW 4 is Sato Singh. He is the uncle of the informant, PW 3, PW 5 is Ranjeet Singh. He is tender. PW 6 is Dr. Chandeshwar Prasad. He has examined the informant-injured, (PW 3). PW 7 is Krishna Jiwan Prasad. He is the I.O. of this case. PW 3, the informant has fully supported the case of the prosecution. According to him, on the day of occurrence, i.e. on 18.4.1986 at about 5.30 a.m. while he along with his cousin Pinku Kumar and Sanjay Kumar and Narayan Singh had gone to bring Cucumber [kakari] from the field and when he was plucking the same, the appellant came there and gave lathi blow on his leg, sustaining the injury he started fleeing away from the field and when he went at some distance, the appellant fired his pistol upon him (the informant) causing him injury on his thigh.
Thereafter he fell down. His nephew Sanjay Kumar and villager Narayan Singh came there. Having seen them the appellant fled away. It has been further stated that the informant was carried by these witnesses near Khandha and they raised alarm from there and on their alarm, villagers came and they took him to the police station where his fardbeyan was recorded. He has further stated that he was brought to Biharasharif Hospital for his treatment. According to him, cause of the occurrence was that one week prior to this occurrence, the appellant wanted to go through the massor grains which was kept in his khalihan and when he objected the appellant threatened him of dire consequences. The other witnesses PWs 1 and 2 have also supported the version of the informant as stated in the fardbeyan. PW 4 is although the hearsay witness but he has also corroborated to evidence of other witnesses. PW 6 is Dr. Chandeshwar Prasad. He has examined the inf
