JUDGEMENT

(Passed on this 27 th day of January, 2022) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short “Cr.P.C”) against the impugned judgment dated 27.02.1999 passed by Sessions Judge, Shajapur in Sessions Trial No.17/1998 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code (in short “IPC”) and sentenced to undergo 3 years' rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.2000/- and in lieu of payment of fine amount further to undergo 4 months' simple imprisonment.

02. Brief facts of the case are that complainant Deepak’s fruit shop was situated at bus stand at Pachore and the accused/appellant is a hawker, who used to sell things on a cart at the same bus stand. On 04.11.1997 at about 7 p.m. some quarrel took place between both of them, at that time appellant stabbed scissors on the abdomen of the victim-Deepak, due to which Deepak sustained grievous injuries and blood started oozing from the injury of the abdomen then Pappu took him to Dr. Gupta's hospital. Police was informed and ASI, Premnarayan Sharma PW-8 met the victim at Krishna hospital, then victim-Deepak launched Dehati Nalishi. On the basis of Dehati Nalishi, F.I.R. was registered at police station-Pachore.

03. Dr. G. Pradhan PW-1 examined the victim and found an incised wound of 1 ½ '' x ½'' x 1 ½'' on the left side of the abdomen. The injury was caused by a sharp cutting object. Victim-Deepak was referred to Indore for further treatment. Dr. B.K. Sharma PW-10 also examined the victim and he operated his abdomen. During the investigation, ASI- S.H. Mishra arrested the accused and recovered scissors from the possession of the accused/appellant. Blood stained shirt was seized from the possession of victim- Deepak. ASI- S.H. Mishra also prepared spot map. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed under Section 307 of IPC. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sarangpur committed the case to the court of Sessions Judge, Shajapur. Sessions Judge, Shajapur on the basis of the allegation made in the charge-sheet framed the charges under Section 307 of IPC.

04. The appellant abjured his guilt and took a plea that he has been falsely implicated in this matter due to previous enmity but he has not examined any witness in his defence. Prosecution examined as many 10 witnesses, who were duly cross-examined by the defence counsel. Trial court after considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and scrutinized the entire evidence on record and convicted the appellant as described above. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal before this Court.

05. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that judgment of the learned trial court is contrary to the law and facts on record. Learned trial court was wrong in not considering the material omissions and contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses and in drawing unwarranted interference. Learned trial court was also wrong in believing the prosecution witnesses and discarding defence version. The independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and conviction is bad in law, hence, he prays that the appeal be allowed and the appellant be acquitted in the present case.

06. Per contra, learned panel lawyer supported the impugned judgment and conviction by submitting that learned trial court on proper appreciation of evidence has recorded the conviction and the same does not call for any interference.

07. In order to appreciate the merits of the rival contentions in the right perspective, it is necessary to first advert the medical evidence on record. Dr. G. Pradhan PW-1, who conducted MLC of the victim-Deepak has proved that the incised wound of 1 ½ '' x ½'' x 1 ½'' was found on the right