High CourtsSingle Bench

Ram Lagan Singh vs The State of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 18 April 2011 · Citation: (2011) 04 PAT CK 0056

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anjana Prakash, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 307, 323, 448
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 89 of 1995
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

7 paragraphs · 299 words

Anjana Prakash, J.—The Appellant has been convicted u/s 307, 323 and 448 I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years, 6 months and 3 months respectively by the judgment dated 17.6.1995 passed by learned IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra passed in Sessions Trial No. 132 of 1981/90 of 1990.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 6.12.1979 at about 4:30 p.m. a dispute arises between the parties over laying of paddy straw on the tiled roof of the disputed house in course of which the Appellant is said to have injured two persons.

3.

The prosecution examined 9 witnesses out of whom P.W. 1, P.W. 6 are formal in nature whereas P.W. 4 and 7 are tendered and P.W. 2, 3 and 5 are material witnesses who all belong to the same family whereas P.W. 8 is the doctor who examined two injured and the P.W. 9 is the Investigating Officer.

4.

Admitted position is that the parties are agnates between themselves and there was dispute over a minor matter which led to the present occurrence. From the manner of occurrence as narrated by the eye-witnesses, it does not appear to be a case of 307 I.P.C. Moreover, the doctor also found simple injuries on the person of the two injured.

5.

In view of such, accepting the prosecution case that an assault was made by the Appellants on the prosecution side, the conviction is altered to one u/s 323 I.P.C. from 307 I.P.C. However, conviction u/s 448 I.P.C. is maintained.

6.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed but with modification in the conviction as stated above and the sentence to period already undergone by the Appellant as sufficient under the two counts.

7.

With the aforesaid modifications the appeal is dismissed.