CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Chandradeo Prasad vs The State of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 11 July 2011 · Citation: (2011) 07 PAT CK 0236

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anjana Prakash, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 307, 325
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 25 of 1997
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 362 words

Anjana Prakash, J.—The Appellant has been convicted u/s 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa, in Sessions Trial No. 57 of 1982 by a judgment dated 23.12.1996.

2.

The Case of the prosecution according to the Informant Indradeo Prasad is that on 14.6.1979 the Appellant who was his cousin called for a Panchayat since he had not paid a sum of Rs. 300/- to the Informant which had been ordered in an earlier Panchayati. In the said Panchayati, the Appellant again refused to make payment of the said amount and instead assaulted him with a Pasuli on account of which he sustained grievous injury.

3.

During trial, the prosecution examined ten witnesses out of whom PW-9 is the Doctor whereas PW-10 is the Investigating Officer. PW-8 is the formal witness and PW-3 has been tendered. PW-6 is a hostile witness. Out of the rest of the witnesses, PW-1 is the Informant whereas PW-4, PW-5 and PW-7 are the witnesses on the point of occurrence.

4.

The five eye witnesses have categorically stated that while the Panchayti was on, the Appellant got enraged instead of making payment, and assaulted the Informant with Pasuli. In view of such categorical statement of the five eye witnesses which stood further corroborated by the Doctor''s evidence who has deposed as PW-9, that he had found four injuries on the person of the Informant, three of which were simple and one grievous, I am not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction. However, in my view, in the facts of the case, at best it would a case u/s 325 of the Indian Penal Code since there appears to be no material that the intention on the part of the Appellant was to cause the death of the Informant.

5.

In the result, even while acquitting the Appellant of the charge u/s 307 of the Indian Penal Code, he is convicted u/s 325 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence is modified to the period already undergone by him during trial.

6.

In the result, the Appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification.