Point of Law: If the injury falls under the specified types under Section 326A on account of use of acid, the offence 326A I.P.C. is attracted. Section 326B I.P.C. can be attracted in a case the requirements specified are met on an attempted acid attack.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

2. Challenge in this Jail Appeal is the judgment and order dated 13.02.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Gautam Budh Nagar in S.T. No. 750 of 2014 (State v. Sunil Prajapati) arising out of Case Crime No. 992 of 2014, under Section 326Ka, 324, 323, 353, 332 & 308 of I.P.C., P.S. Sector 39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar whereby the Learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act has convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 308 I.P.C. four years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 2000/-fine in default of payment three months additional simple imprisonment; under Section 324 I.P.C. two years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1000/-fine and in default of fine one month simple imprisonment; under Section 326A I.P.C. 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 10,000/-fine and in default six months additional simple imprisonment; under Section 332 I.P.C. two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/-and in default of payment of fine of Rs. 2000/-one month simple imprisonment; under Section 353 I.P.C. one year rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1000 fine and in default of payment of fine of Rs. 1000/-one month additional simple imprisonment. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the prosecution case is that the complainant Anil Kumar Sharma lodged an F.I.R. on 20.09.2014 at 16:30 hours against appellant Sunil Prajapati at P.S. Sector 39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, stating therein that on 20.09.2014 at 11:00 hours, appellant Sunil Prajapati came to the office of the complainant having one plastic jug filled with inflammable substance and poured the same on the injured Jitendra Shandilya and took him out of the office and assaulted on his head several times by brick and iron rod. In the incident, injured Jitendra Shandilya sustained grievous injuries on his head. After beating the Anil Kumar, J.E. and Mithun Operator, appellant fled from there. The appellant has obstructed the government work. Jitendra Shandilya was taken to the Kailash hospital, Sec-27 where he could not be treated properly and then he was brought to Fortis hospital, Sec-62 and was admitted in I.C.U. ward. He received 22 stitches in his head and both eyes were injured and burnt also.

4. On the written report submitted by Anil Kumar Sharma, S.D.O. Electricity Office, a case was registered against the appellant Sunil Prajapati at P.S. Sector 39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar in Case Crime no. 992 of 2014, under Section 326Ka, 324, 323, 353, 332, 308 of I.P.C., P.S. Sector 39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

5. Police started investigation, prepared recovery memo of plastic jug and inflammable substance lying on the floor and collected the evidence. Statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the appellant Sunil Prajapati in Case Crime No. 992 of 2014, under Section 326Ka, 324, 323, 353, 332 of I.P.C., P.S. Sector 39 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

6. The then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, on 26.11.2014 committed the case of appellant to the Sessions Court for trial. The Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act on 14.05.2015 charged the appellant under Sections 323, 324, 326Ka, 308, 353 & 332 of I.P.C. Appellant Sunil Prajapati denied the charges and claimed trial.

7. Prosecution was called upon to adduce evidence. Evidence of PW1 Anil Kumar Sharma complainant/informant, PW2 injured Jitendra Shandilya, PW3 J.E. Anil Kumar, PW4 Dr. Amit Saxena, PW5 Dr. Surjeet Singh, PW6 S.O. Shiv Prakash Singh, PW7 Avadhesh Kumar Awasthi, PW8 Naresh Kumar were recorded.

8. Statement of appellant Sunil Prajapati was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., appellant denied the evidence and said he has been prosecuted due to enmity.

9. A