Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.
Ramesh and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 321 of 1986.
Decided On : 27-05-2013
CRIMINAL APPEAL - ATTEMPT TO MURDER - SECTION 307 I.P.C. - SECTION 308 I.P.C. - SECTION 149 I.P.C. - SECTION 147 I.P.C. - SECTION 148 I.P.C. - SECTION 325 I.P.C. - SECTION 324 I.P.C. - SECTION 323 I.P.C. - PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT - SECTION 4 - SECTION 360 CR.P.C. - CONVICTION ALTERED FROM SECTION 307 I.P.C. TO SECTION 308 I.P.C. - SENTENCE REDUCED TO PERIOD ALREADY UNDERGONE - BENEFIT OF SECTION 4 OF THE PROBATION OF OFFENDERS ACT AND SECTION 360 CR.P.C. GRANTED TO CERTAIN APPELLANTS - FINE IMPOSED.
Fact of the Case:
A criminal appeal was filed by the accused appellants against their conviction and sentence for attempt to murder, causing grievous hurt, and other offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The incident occurred in 1983 due to an altercation over uprooted grass from a common boundary, resulting in injuries to both parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court had erred in convicting the appellants under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder) instead of Section 308 IPC (attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder). The court also found that the trial court had not properly considered the injuries sustained by the accused appellants and had failed to explain them.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellants could be convicted under Section 308 IPC instead of Section 307 IPC. 2. Whether the appellants were entitled to the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and Section 360 Cr.P.C. 3. Whether the appellants should be sentenced to the period already undergone in confinement or serve the remaining sentence.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the injuries sustained by the injured party, as described in the medical evidence, did not fall under the definition of grievous injuries that could lead to death in the ordinary course of nature. Therefore, the appellants' conviction under Section 307 IPC was altered to Section 308 IPC. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the long pendency of the trial and appeal, the advanced age of the appellants, and their lack of criminal history, the court found it appropriate to grant the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and Section 360 Cr.P.C. to certain appellants. 3. The court reduced the sentences of the appellants to the period already undergone in confinement, considering the ends of justice and the fact that they had already served a significant portion of their sentences.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal. The conviction of the appellants under Section 307 IPC was altered to Section 308 IPC. The sentences of the appellants were reduced to the period already undergone in confinement. Certain appellants were granted the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and Section 360 Cr.P.C. on furnishing personal bonds and sureties. The appellants were directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, which would be disbursed to the injured persons in equal proportion. Failure to pay the fine within three months would result in an additional one-year sentence.
1. Ramesh, 2. Mst. Prem, 3. Mst. Kamla, 4. Mst. Kinna, 5. Mst. Sarvo under Section 307 I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. Three years R.I. and fine of Rs. 300/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further three months R.I., under Section 325/149 I.P.C. 2½ years R.I. and fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo 2= months R.I. Under Section 324/149 I.P.C. for 1½ years, under Section 323/149 I.P.C. to suffer three months R.I. and under Section 147 I.P.C. to suffer six months R.I. Accused Dhandholi under Section 148 I.P.C., to suffer one year R.I., under Section 307 I.P.C. to suffer four years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 400/- and in default four months R.I., under Section 325/149 I.P.C. three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default 3 months R.I., under Section 324 I.P.C., 1½ years R.I. and under Section 323/149 I.P.C., three months S.I. Manohari under Section 147 I.P.C., to suffer Six months R.I., under Section 325 I.P.C. to suffer three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/-and in default three months R.I., under Section 307/149 I.P.C. four years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 400/- and in default 4 months R.I., under Section 324 I.P.C. 1½ years R.I. and under Section 323/149 I.P.C. three months S.I. Ramsingh under Section 147 I.P.C. to suffer six months R.I., under Section 325 I.P.C. to suffer three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default three months R.I. under Section 307/149 I.P.C. four years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 400/- and in default 4 months R.I., under Section 324/149 I.P.C. 1½ years R.I. and under Section 323/149 I.P.C. three months S.I. All the sentences to run concurrently.
"eSa xko >kjsM+k dks jgus okyk gwa] dkSe ls pkcnkj gwa] jkeflag] /kU/kksyh o euksgjh esjs rkm ds yM+ds gS] tks gekjs cVfu;k gSA ge nksuksa ikVhZ ,d gh dqvk ij jgrs gSA jkeflag oxSjk gekj tehu dks gM+iuk pkgrs gS vkSj gjsd rjg ls gels >xM+k djrs jgrs gSA gekjs [ksr dh Mksy o muds [ksr dh Mksy ,d gh gS] tks lkeykrh lh gSA vkt fn esa ml Mksy esa ls ukekywe tkus dksu ?kkl [ksn ys x;k ftl ij gekjs dks mUgksaus fnu esa vkyguk fn;k o gels dgu lqu gks x;hA 'kke dks djhc 7 cts dh ckr gSA eSa o esjk HkkbZ eksrh yky nksuksa gekjs edku ds lkeus cSBs Fks fd brus esa jkeflag o /kU/kksyh viuh M~;wVh nsdj ?kj x;s vkSj vkrs gh ,dne ls gesa xkyh xqQrkj djrs gq, vius ?kjksa esa ls x.Mklh o ykfB;ka fy, gq, vk;s ftuesa jkeflag] /kU/kksyh] euksgjh filjku uFkqvk o jes'k iq= jkeflag o mudh vkSjrsa fdUuk] izse] deyk o mudh cfgu loksZ Fkh vkSj vkrs gh eq>s o esjs HkkbZ dks pkjksa rjQ ls ?ksj fy;k] vkSj lHkh x.Mklh;ksa o ykfB;ksa ls ekjuk 'kq: dj fn;kA lcls igys esjs HkkbZ eksrh yky dks o eq>s ekjk] gesa cpkus ds fy, eq0 f'konsbZ] :ek deyk o Jheu ehuk vk;s] rks mudks Hkh ekjk] esjs HkkbZ ds NksVs cPps iIiw dks Hkh ekSds ij gekjs vykok ueks o vkseh iM+kslh;ku us ;g lkjh ?kVuk ns[kh gSA gekjs HkkbZ eksrhyky dk tckM+k VwV x;k] tks csgks'k gSA gekjk lc dk MkDV~h eqvk;uk dj fy;k gS] tks is'k gSA"
The F.I.R. was registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 325 and 323 I.P.C. After investigation the police has filed challan before the Judicial Magistrate Hinduan City and thereafter the case was committed to the Sessions Judge Sawai Madhopur and it was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Camp Gangapur City. The trial Court framed the charge against the accused appellant and thereafter prosecution examined witnesses and exhibited documents. The st
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
