Godhan Singh vs State of U.P.

Kundan Singh, J.—This revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 23.3.1984 passed by the 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Agra, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 249 of 1983 and affirming the conviction and sentence of 18 months'' R.I. u/s 325, I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 2,000. In default of payment the applicant was directed to undergo further three months'' R.I. and conviction and sentence of three months'' R.I. u/s 323, I.P.C. and three months'' R.I. u/s 504, I.P.C. with a direction to run all the substantive sentences concurrently in Criminal Case No. 1629 of 1981.

Heard Shri G.S. Hajela, counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

According to the prosecution, the bullock of the applicant damaged the crop of the complainant, the complainant brought the bullock from his field to the accused and reprehended him for the same which resulted into exchange of hot words. The applicant twisted the hand of the complainant. The other co-accused who were there, also abused and threatened the complainant. The learned Magistrate after going through the evidence on record convicted and sentenced the applicant alone as stated above. Being aggrieved the applicant preferred the appeal against his conviction and sentence before the Sessions Judge. The 11th Additional Sessions Judge considering the whole evidence and the submission of learned Counsel for the applicant, did not find any merit in the appeal, accordingly, he dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Magistrate, the applicant has come up before this Court in this revision against his conviction and sentence.

Shri G.S. Hajela, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that it is not proved by the prosecution in this case that the X-ray plate filed by the prosecution was of the complainant.

I have perused the judgment and considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the applicant. This point has already been dealt with by the learned Magistrate as well as by the learned appellate court and the finding was recorded with the X-ray plate belonged to complainant himself.

learned Counsel for the applicant contended that the sentence is too severe. The little finger is said to have fractured. The applicant has remained in jail for about a week. The sentence may be reduced to already undergone.

I have given anxious thought to the submission made on behalf of the applicant. It is true that the applicant has been convicted and sentenced in respect of an incident which took place on 26.3.1980 and the applicant has suffered lot of mental agony for about 17 years. From the record, it does not appear that the applicant has not deposited the amount of fine after the dismissal of the appeal. In case the sentence under Sections 323 and 504, I.P.C. is reduced to a period already undergone and in addition a fine of Rs. 3,000 is imposed, it would serve the ends of justice.

Accordingly, the revision is dismissed with the modification that the conviction of the applicant under Sections 325, 323 and 504. I.P.C., awarded by the trial court and affirmed by the lower appellate court, are maintained. However, the sentence for those offences is reduced to a term already undergone in addition the fine of Rs. 3,000 is imposed. In case this amount of fine of Rs. 3,000 is realised, that amount will be paid to the complainant, Narain Singh. The applicant is allowed three months'' time to deposit the amount of fine from today.