Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
Shailendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1181 of 2003
Decided On : 09-02-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 307, Sections 379 or 380 or 381 or 404 or 420 and 324 - U.P. of the Probation of Offenders Act - Section 4 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 357, 361, 360 , 294 and 313 - Attempt to murder – Examination of accused - Alleged incident has been lodged by first informant with allegation that some persons had come at the house of informant for celebrating – Held, Section 357 Cr.P.C. and Section 5 of Offenders Act empowers Court to award compensation to the victims of the offence in respect of the loss/injury suffered. The object of the section is to meet the ends of justice in a better way. This section was enacted to reassure the victim that he is not forgotten in the criminal justice system - Amount of compensation to be awarded under Section 357 Cr.P.C - Depends upon the nature of crime, extent of loss/damage suffered and the capacity of accused to pay - Appeal is partly allowed
JUDGMENT :
SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. Heard Mr. S.H. Ibrahim, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 26.7.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 7, Lucknow in S.T. No. 584 of 1998 arising out of Crime No. 151 of 1992 concerning Police Station Hasanganj, District Lucknow convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment.
3. The brief facts of the present case emerges as such F.I.R. of the alleged incident has been lodged by first informant, Raj Kumar Singh with the allegation that on 29.3.1992 at about 9:30 p.m. some persons had come at the house of informant for celebrating ‘Holi’ festival. After celebrating the Holi when first informant and his elder brother were going to see off then on the way son of Shiv Raj Singh opened fire from Awasthi Jee's roof with intention to kill. Due to the alleged incident of firing, the first informant, his elder brother and other persons have got several injuries on the body. On the basis of above allegations, the F.I.R. was lodged against Shailendra Singh (the present appellant) S/o Shiv Raj Singh under Sections 324/307 I.P.C.
4. Investigation of the present case was entrusted to the Investigating Officer. During the course of investigation, the name of Shailendra Singh (the present appellant) S/o Shiv Raj Singh first time came into light. Chiranjeet Lal, Mahendra Pratap Singh, K.K. Singh and R.K. Singh have got injuries in the present incident. During the course of the investigation, Investigating Officer collected the injury report of all the injured persons and prepared site map of incident. The Investigating Officer also recorded the statement of witnesses and after completing the formalities of the investigation filed charge sheet against the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. Charge-Sheet was submitted in the Magistrate Court wherein the case was committed to the court of sessions on 16.4.1998 where it was registered as S.T. No. 584 of 1998. The charges were framed against the appellant under Section 307 I.P.C. on 15.6.1998. The charges were read over to the appellant in Hindi. The appellant denied the charges levelled against him and claimed to be tried.
5. During the course of the trial following witnesses were examined by the prosecution, which are read as under:
(ii) PW-2 Krishna Kumar Singh is also another injured eye-witness.
(iii) PW-3 Mahendra Pratap Singh is also another injured eye-witness.
(iv) PW-4 Om Prakash Srivastava, who is also radiologist, has proved the X-ray report of Mahendra Pratap Singh as Ext.Ka-2, X-ray report of Krishna Kumar Singh as Ext.Ka-3 and X-ray report of Raj Kumar Singh as Ext.Ka-4.
(v) PW-5 N.K. Kapil, the Investigating Officer, who proved the site plan as Ext.Ka-5, charge-sheet as Ext.Ka-6, chik F.I.R. as Ext.Ka-7 and G.D. No. 62 as Ext.Ka-8.
Injury report and supplementary affidavit of the injured was also admitted by the prosecution under Section 294 Cr.P.C. The medical report of Chiranjeet Lal was Ext.Ka-9, medical report of Mahendra Pratap Singh was Ext.Ka-10, medical report of Krishna Kumar Singh was Ext.Ka-11, medical report of R.K. Singh was Ext.Ka-12. X-ray report of the Chiranjeet Lal was Ext.Ka-13, supplementary report of Krishna Kumar Singh was Ext.Ka-14 and supplementary report of Raj Kumar Singh was Ext.Ka-15.
Thus, the prosecution relied upon oral evidences of PW-1 to PW-5 and relied upon documentary evidence of Ext.Ka-1 to Ext.Ka-15.
6. After recording the testimony of the witnesses, the statements of the accused/appella
The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the nature of the injury and the circumstances of the case in altering the conviction under Section 307 I.P.C. to Section 324/....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC to determine culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and the extension of the benefit of proba....
Point of Law : Incident is not such as to direct accused to undergo sentence of imprisonment. In our opinion, it is a fit case in which the accused should be released on probation by directing them t....
Section 324 I.P.C. is as voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means.
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
