Back
1986 Supreme(Raj) 130
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : G.M.LODHA
MUNNA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Respondent
Criminal Appeal 367 Of 1978
Decided On : 05/08/1986
Kanta Bhatnagar, R.N.Khandelwal, R.P.GARG, S.B.MATHUR, S.J.Kota
In cases involving violent attacks causing grievous injuries, the courts will uphold sentences that are appropriate and proportionate to the gravity of the offence, even if the appellant seeks leniency.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 324, IPC - CAUSING INCISED WOUNDS - INTERPRETATION OF INJURIES AND CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES - UPHOLDING OF SENTENCE.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Munna, was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for causing incised wounds on the person of Babboo. The injuries included deep wounds on the right cheek, right foot, right leg, and left parietal area of the scalp. The trial court sentenced Munna to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200, with an additional three months of imprisonment in default of payment.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court upheld the trial court's conviction and sentence, finding that the evidence against Munna was credible and that the injuries caused were grievous in nature. The court noted that Munna had continued to attack Babboo even after causing the first injury, and that he had done so because Babboo had refused to participate in a criminal act.
Issues: 1. Whether the evidence against Munna was sufficient to prove that he had caused the injuries on Babboo. 2. Whether the injuries caused were grievous in nature. 3. Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was appropriate.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court found that the testimony of Babboo, the injured witness, was credible and reliable, despite some minor contradictions in his statements. The court noted that Babboo had been confronted with a sudden and violent attack by Munna, and that his psychological state during the incident could explain the inconsistencies in his account. 2. The court held that the injuries caused to Babboo were grievous in nature, as they required extensive medical treatment and had the potential to cause permanent disfigurement. 3. The court found that the sentence imposed by the trial court was appropriate, given the seriousness of the offence and the fact that Munna had shown no remorse for his actions.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
G. M. LODHA, J.
( 1 ) THIS is one of those cases where I do not feel inclined to interfere even on the question of sentence, although the offence with which the appellant-accused is found guilty is S. 324, IPC. The appellant was sentenced under S. 324, IPC, to one years R. I. with a fine of Rs. 200/- in default of payment of fine, 3 months R. I.
( 2 ) THE circumstances of the case when considered and pondered more and more make the gravity and seriousness of the offence from bad to worse.
( 3 ) THE appellant has been held guilty for causing incised wound by knife on the person of the injured Babboo. The injuries found on the person of Babboo as per the medical evidence of Dr. M. M. Mishra (PW 1) are as under : 1. Incised wound 2r" X 3/4" X 3/4" bone deep on the right cheek maxillary area, doubtful fracture, so X-ray was advised. 2. Incised wound 2" X 1/2 X 1/4on dorsal side right foot on 1st, second and third matacarpal area, oblique doubtful fracture, so X-ray was advised. 3. Incised wound 2" X 1/2" X 1/2" on lower 1/3rd right leg on outer side oblique doubtful fracture, so X-ray was advised.
( 4 ) INCISED wound 2 1/2" X 1/2" X 1/4" bone deep on the left parietal area of scalp oblique doubtful fracture, so X-Ray was advised.
( 5 ) INCISED wound 1 1/2" X 1/4" X 1/4on left parietal area of scalp transverse behind injury No. 4, it was simple.
( 6 ) INCISED wound 1" X 1/20 X 1/20on back of left shoulder, movements free. It was simple. 4. Obviously, the injuries had been caused on the right cheek parietal area of scalp left shoulder, right foot and right leg. 5. Injury Nos. 1 and 3 have been found to be grievous, and injury Nos. 2 and 4 found to be simple. 6. The trial Court has considered whether Munna is responsible and liable for the injuries. The injured, Abdul Shakoor, was called by Munna and asked to accompany him for cutting hands and feet of one Kalyan. The injured refused to do so saying that he is a person having a family and this resulted in the incident where the accused-appellant Munna took out knife and started causing injuries one after the other.
( 7 ) SINCE other witnesses have turned hostile the case depends upon the testimony of Babboo and the medical evidence corroborating it. It was argued that since the injured has mentioned two witnesses Ibrahim and Mohd. Bashir, both of whom have stated that they came later on when Babboo was lying injured and, therefore, Babboo must be disbelieved. I am not inclined to accept this contention because these two witnesses have been treated hostile and rightly so. It was then argued that there are some contradictions in the statement of Babboo from the prior statement to the police. I have also examined them and I do not find that there is much and serious contradictions.
( 8 ) WHEN an injured is confronted with an accused whipping out a knife and causing a number of injuries by repeated attacks, psychological breakdown of the injured is a natural phenomenon. He cannot be expected to observe an attack on him, like a spectator sitting in air-conditioned cinema house, watching a movie. Natural impulse of the injured would be to save himself, change posture, try to escape when there are volleys of knife attacks like gun fire as has happened in this case.
( 9 ) IF there are minor variances in the description of chronological events, causing injuries, or exact place and the manner in which the knife was used, it only provides more credence to the credibility of the witness, and rules out concoction and tutorism. I am, therefore, convinced that the present one is a case where the injureds statement is of sterling worth and supported by the medical evidence and deserves to be believed in toto.
( 10 ) AS I have mentioned at the very threshold of my this judgment that the present one is a typical case where so leniency can be shown for the reduction of the sentence of imprisonment.
( 11 ) THE reasons are manifold firstly the accused did not stop after causing one inju
