Back
2017 Supreme(Guj) 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Z.K. Saiyed, J.
Rajusing Ajabsing Rajput - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 972 of 2000 and Criminal Misc. Application No. 8972 of 2016 in Criminal Appeal No. 972 of 2000
Decided On : 09-01-2017
For the Appellant : Shashikant S. Gade
For the Respondent: N.J. Shah
Headnote:
Criminal Law – Criminal Trial – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 374(2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 333 and 504 read with Section 114 – Convicted – Appeal against conviction – Challenged – Quarrel – Grievous Injury – Prosecution case, Nutuankumar Arvindbhai is doing service as Junior Clerk in Hospita – Nutankumars duty was in O.P.D. Department to take out register of patient case papers – At about 1:00 p.m. two persons came in his cabin and told him to give case paper at earliest – Nutankumar told them to stand in queue – They got provoked and started abusing out of them one person had put on red shirt who hold Nutankumar by collar and gave punch on face and gave blow of hatha of chair, which was put over the table, on palm of Nutankumar – Due to shouting policeman came in O.P.D. Department. P.W. No. 1 - caught-hold Vakhatsinh, Police Constable person with red-shirt, at that time, the person with red-shirt gave punch on the face so his upper left tooth came out. P.W. No. 3 Police Constable Pahadsinh Ditaji Bhedi and other staff persons rushed there. Police went in O.P.D. Department and caught-hold both the persons. The person with red shirt Rajusing Ajaysinh, Malsing Premsing Rajput - is accused No. 2. Both the persons are doing work in Civil Hospital Canteen – Nutankumar sustained injury in head and on right hand palm and Vakhatsinhs both the teeth were removed – Held, When the quarrel took place near O.P.D. Department victim police constable rushed to the place for law and order, at that time, present appellant provoked and beaten police constable and in result of that punch was given to him on the face and crown of tooth was broken – Injured witness is public servant and in cross-examination some minor contradiction is made but that contradiction is not material contradiction – Case medical expert is examined by the prosecution and learned Judge has rightly considered evidence of the medical expert and it is proved through oral version of doctor as well as evidence of the eyewitness – Prosecution has completely proved chain of evidence against the present appellant – So far as argument for probation is concerned, the learned Judge has taken very lenient view and conviction of present appellant is only for a period of one year – As per provisions of Section 332 and 333 of IPC are concerned, present appellant is convicted for very lesser punishment – Order of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial Court confirmed – Appeal is dismissed and Criminal Misc. Application No. 8972 of 2016 stands disposed of. (Paras 17 to 20)
Z.K. Saiyed, J.
1. By way of present appeal, filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of conviction dated 13.10.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 19, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 263 of 1998. The said case was registered against the appellant-original accused for the offences punishable under Sections 333 and 504 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant is sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, R.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 333 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. According to the prosecution case, Nutuankumar Arvindbhai is doing service as Junior Clerk in Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad. On 3.9.1987 Nutankumar's duty was in O.P.D. Department to take out register of patient case papers. At about 1:00 p.m. two persons came in his cabin and told him to give case paper at the earliest. Nutankumar told them to stand in queue. They got provoked and started abusing. Out of them one person had put on red shirt who hold Nutankumar by collar and gave punch on face and gave blow of hatha of chair, which was put over the table, on the palm of Nutankumar. Due to shouting policeman came in O.P.D. Department. P.W. No. 1 - caught-hold Vakhatsinh, Police Constable person with red-shirt, at that time, the person with red-shirt gave punch on the face so his upper left tooth came out. P.W. No. 3 Police Constable Pahadsinh Ditaji Bhedi and other staff persons rushed there. Police went in O.P.D. Department and caught-hold both the persons. The person with red shirt Rajusing Ajaysinh, Malsing Premsing Rajput - is accused No. 2. Both the persons are doing work in Civil Hospital Canteen. Nutankumar sustained injury in head and on right hand palm and Vakhatsinh's both the teeth were removed. Both the persons took treatment at hospital and thereafter the complainant lodged the complaint in Shahibaug Police Station.
3. On the basis of above allegations, investigation was carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested and, ultimately, charge-sheet came to be filed against them. As the case was sessions triable the same was committed to the Court of Sessions.
4. Thereafter, charge came to be framed and explained to the accused persons, to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In order to bring home the charges against the accused persons, prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.
6. Thereafter, after filing closing pursis by the prosecution, further statements of accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded. The accused persons have denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against them.
7. At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned Judgment, convicted the present appellant - accused.
8. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of conviction dated 13.10.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 19, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 263 of 1998, the present appellant - accused has preferred the present Appeal before this Court.
9. Heard Mr. Minesh Arenpuriya, learned advocate appearing for Mr. S.S. Gade, learned advocate for the appellant. He has contended that prosecution has examined the complainant P.W. No. 1 - Nutankumar Arvindbhai at Ex. 10 who has submitted that police has taken his signature on complaint and he has not lodged FIR. He had not gone to Shahibaug Police Station. He does not know a person with red shirt. He also submitted that he does not know that a person with red shirt has beaten him. He submitted that he does not know that Vakhatsinh, Police Constable ran to the place of incident. He subm
