Babu vs The State of Maharashtra

M.L. Tahaliyani, J.—Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned APP for the State. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s. 304 (Part-II) of Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. Five Thousand. It was further directed that the fine amount recovered, shall be paid to the informant by way of compensation u/s. 357(1) of Cr.P.C.

The appellant was tried for the offence punishable u/s. 302 of IPC. However, the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the appellant had no intention to cause death of the deceased or he had no intention to cause injury of the nature which might be sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of the nature. The trial Court came to the conclusion that the appellant had knowledge that the injuries caused by him to the deceased were likely to cause death of the deceased. It is in this background that the appellant has been convicted for the offence u/s. 304 (Part II) of IPC.

The learned counsel for the appellant has invited my attention to the evidence of medical officer and has submitted that there were minor external injuries on body of the deceased. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant never knew that the fist blows could cause severe injuries to the internal vital part of the body. It is submitted that therefore, knowledge cannot be attributed to the appellant. It is contended that the case of the appellant may fall u/s. 323 of IPC, as external injuries are of simple nature.

The learned APP Mr. Nerlikar has submitted that though the external injuries are of simple nature, the fist and kick blows inflicted by the appellant, had caused severe internal injuries, which are described by the Medical Officer in his evidence. The Medical Officer has also opined that the injuries found during internal examination could be caused by fist blows. The deceased had died due to severe hemorrhage to Spleen, Lever and Stomach. Mr. Nerlikar, learned APP has further submitted that had it been the case of a single or two blows, the argument of learned counsel could have been considered. It is submitted by Mr. Nerlikar that the appellant went on inflicting successive blows on the deceased, which clearly indicates that the appellant had knowledge that his act was likely to cause death of the deceased.

The learned counsel Mr. Laddha has submitted that even if case of the appellant does not fall u/s. 323 of IPC, this Court may consider the reduction in the sentence, particularly in view of the fact that no weapon was used by the appellant and appellant had inflicted fist and kick blows only because the deceased had abused mother of appellant and brought his mother''s name in disgrace. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for appellant and the learned APP. The learned counsel does not press that the appellant may be convicted u/s. 323 of IPC only. However, he presses for reduction in sentence. I have gone through evidence of Medical Officer. Most of the internal injuries are caused by fist and kick blows. In such circumstances, the Court has to consider whether rustic villager can know that by inflicting fist and kick blows, he could cause severe internal injuries to vital part of the body, which may result in death. In my considered opinion, the appellant himself probably did not know that he, by his act was likely to cause death of the deceased. It appears to me that appellant only wanted to inflict fist and kick blows because of the abuses hurled by the deceased. Since there is no minimum punishment prescribed u/s. 304 (Part-II) of IPC, the learned APP Mr. Nerlikar submitted that this Court may not interfere with the judgment of learned trial Court as the learned trial Court has exercised discretion in a very judicious manner and the order does not call for any intervention. I have gone through the judgment of learned trial Court. The learned trial Court has stated that in its view, the quantum of seven years punishment would meet the ends of justice. However, after having considered the nature of quarrel and the reason for abrupt infliction of fist blows on the part of appellant, I am of the view that the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court needs to be modified. As already stated by me, the appellant himself did not probably realize that fist and kick blows inflicted by him may result in severe injuries to the vital parts and cause death of the deceased. Obviously, the appellant did not want to cause injuries to the spleen, lever and stomach. Infliction of fist blows was the natural reaction in the situation in which the incident had occurred. In view thereof, in my opinion, the sentence of three years Rigorous Imprisonment will meet the ends of justice. Hence I pass the following order:

ORDER

1] Appeal is partly allowed.

2] Conviction of the appellant punishable u/s. 304 (Part-II) of IPC is maintained.

3] The appellant is sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs. Five Thousand, in default to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three months.

4] Fine amount if recovered shall be paid to Karbhari Punjaji Bagul, resident of Nimbhora, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad by way of compensation u/s. 357(1) of Cr.P.C.

5] The appellant is in custody since 11/12/2011. Set off be given for the period already undergone by the appellant.

6] Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.