Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.
PURKHARAM JAT - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1175, 784 of 2017
Decided On : 08-02-2018
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTIONS 323, 325, 447 IPC - FACTUAL MATRIX INVOLVING ASSAULT, CAUSING GRIEVOUS INJURY, AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS - IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED, TEST IDENTIFICATION PARADE, AND SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants, Purkharam and Jaggaram, were convicted by the Special Court SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act for offenses under Sections 323, 325, and 447 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The charges stemmed from an incident where they allegedly entered the house of the complainant, Jogaram, and his mother, Smt. Bastu Devi, and caused grievous injuries to both of them. The appellants challenged their conviction and sentence, arguing that they were not properly identified, that a test identification parade was not conducted, and that the sentence was excessive.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the testimony of eyewitnesses Jogaram and Smt. Nirma, the medical reports of the injuries sustained by the victims, and the recovery of lathies from the possession of the appellants, was sufficient to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court rejected the appellants' arguments regarding identification, holding that the incident occurred in the night but the victims were able to identify the appellants due to their familiarity with them. The court also found that the absence of a test identification parade did not invalidate the identification process.
Issues: 1. Whether the identification of the appellants was proper and reliable, given that the incident occurred at night. 2. Whether the failure to conduct a test identification parade rendered the identification process invalid. 3. Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive and required modification.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the identification of the appellants was proper and reliable, despite the fact that the incident occurred at night. The court reasoned that the victims were familiar with the appellants and were able to identify them even in the dark. 2. The court held that the failure to conduct a test identification parade did not invalidate the identification process. The court reasoned that there was no requirement under the law to conduct a test identification parade in every case and that the circumstances of the case did not warrant such a procedure. 3. The court held that the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive and required modification. The court considered the age of the appellants at the time of the incident, the period of time they had spent in custody, and the nature of the injuries sustained by the victims. The court reduced the sentence for the offense under Section 323 IPC from six months to three months and enhanced the fine, and reduced the sentence for the offense under Section 325 IPC from three years to three months and enhanced the fine.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appellants' appeals. The convictions and sentences under Section 447 IPC were maintained. The sentences under Sections 323 and 325 IPC were reduced, with the terms of imprisonment reduced to three months and the fines enhanced. The court directed the appellants to deposit the fines within one month, failing which they would be sent to jail to serve the remaining sentence.
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
The instant criminal appeals have been filed by the accused appellants namely Purkharam and Jaggaram @ Jagdish Under Sections 323, 325, 447 of IPC against the judgment dated 11.05.2017 passed by the Special Court SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, Cases Jodhpur in Sessions Case No. 27/2009 NCV No. 257/2014 by which the Court convicted the accused-appellants for offences under Sections 323, 325, 447 of IPC and passed the following sentence :-
Section 323 IPC-Six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to further undergo one month simple imprisonment.
Section 325 IPC-Three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/- each in default to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.
Section 447 IPC-Three months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- each in default to further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The brief facts of the case are that complainant Jogaram (PW/7) filed a report at the police station Dechu alleging that on 03.03.2009 in the night at about 11:00 PM, he was sleeping in his house. His mother and sister both resided nearby his house. At that time, Laduram, Purkharam and Jagdish entered his mother's house and they used abusive language. They were having lathis and started beating his mother and sister. At their shout, Jogaram reached there and intervened, then all the accused gave fist blows to him. They threatened the mother and sister, saying that she should vacate the house otherwise they will kill them. Thus the accused persons entered the house of his mother and caused grievous injury to his mother as well as sister.
3. On the said report, the Police registered a formal FIR No.29/2009 (Ex.P/15) for offence under Sections 323, 325, 447 of IPC and started the investigation. After usual investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused-appellants as well as one more accused Laduram before the Court of Judicial Magistrate Balesar, Jodhpur for offences punishable under Sections 460, 323, 325/34 IPC and 3(1)(v), 3(i) (x), 3(2)(V) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act [hereinafter referred to as 'SC/ST Act']. Later on, the case was transferred in the Court of Special Court SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Cases Jodhpur where the charges were framed against the accused appellants for offence under Sections 460, 323, 325 IPC and 3 (1) (x) 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act but the accused appellants denied the charges and pleaded for trial.
4. During this period, the co-accused Laduram absconded so, the trial commenced against the present appellants only. The trial Court examined as many as eleven witnesses in all and exhibited several documents. Thereafter the statements of the accused-appellants were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 No witness was examined on the defense side.
5. At the conclusion of the trial, the trial Court acquitted the accused appellants for offence under Section 460 IPC and section 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act but the trial Court convicted the present appellants for offences under Section 323, 325, 447 IPC and sentenced them as mentioned above.
6. Learned counsels for the appellants submitted that the occurrence took place in the night at about 11:00 PM. At this time there is no question of identification of the appellants. Further, after the arrest of the accused appellants, no test identification parade was held and without identification, it cannot be said that the accused appellants entered the house of the injured and caused injuries. Learned counsels further argued that there are major contradictions, omissions and improvement in the statement of injured witness Nirma (PW/4) as well as statement of complainant Jogaram (PW/7). Lastly they argued that recovery was made from an open place so, recovery in this case does not connect the appellants with the crime. Therefore, both the appellants should be acquitted in this case.
7. Per contra, the learne
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
