The conviction for attempt to murder was upheld based on sufficient evidence, while the sentences were reduced for being excessive.

Judgment :

(Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.)

1. This criminal appeal preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.02.2023 (Annexure A/1), passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh in Sessions Trial No.41/2021 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Karamsingh Ratre), by which the appellant has been convicted for offences as under :-

(All the sentences are to run concurrently.)

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 17.03.2020 at around 11:30 to 12.00 at night at Village – Soopa, Police Station – Poosour, District - Raigarh, the appellant herein assaulted Ratiram Soni (PW-2) on his head with axe and also threatened him to kill and, thereby, have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. Thereafter, the written complaint was made by Gayatri Soni (PW-01), who is daughter-in-law of the injured/ ex- wife of the appellant, pursuant to which, the police registered FIR (Ex.P/2). Spot Map and Nazari Naksha were prepared vide Ex.P/3 & Ex.P/5 respectively. Pursuant to memorandum statement of the appellant (Ex.P/9), recorded in the presence of witnesses namely, Mahendra Ratre (PW-9) and Amritlal Banjare (PW-6), axe was seized vide Ex.P-10. MLC was conducted by Dr. Arun Patel (PW- 10) vide Ex.P-16 and zygomatic bone was found fractured and several lacerated wounds were also present. Query Report is at Ex./17 and as per X-Ray and Test Reports (Ex.P/18 & Ex.P/19), no bone injury was present over the body of the injured. FSL report (Ex.P/24) provides that human blood has been found in the seized undergarments and shirt of the injured.

4. The trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences under Section 506, 307 & 201 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him as above, against which the present appeal has been preferred.

5. Mr. Manoj Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that that prosecution has not been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and as such, the trial Court has erred in convicting the appellant for the aforesaid offences. In alternative, he would submit that the victim- Ratiram Soni (PW-02) was hospitalized only for three days and, therefore, considering the nature of injury that only zygomatic bone was found fractured and the appellant is in jail since 16.02.2023 i.e. 02 years & 16 days and during the trial he remained in custody for ten days; therefore, he may be sentenced for the period already undergone and the appeal be allowed in part.

6. On the other hand, Dr. Surendra Kumar Dewangan, learned State counsel would support the impugned judgment and submit that the prosecution has been able to bring home the offence beyond reasonable doubt and the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offence; therefore, the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection.

8. Now, the question is, whether the trial court is justified in convicting the appellant for offence under Section 307 of the IPC ?

9. At this stage, it would be appropriate to notice Section 307 of the IPC which states as under: -

“307. Attempt to murder.—Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by suc