Rampal vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

G.S. Solanki, J.—The Third Additional Sessions Judge, Satna passed the impugned judgment dated 28.9.2006 in S.T. No. 69/2005 by which the Appellant/accused has been convicted u/s 304 Part II of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine amount, further Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months.

Being aggrieved the Appellant/accused has preferred this appeal u/s 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure

The prosecution case in short is that on 23.1.2005 at about 9''O clock a panchayat was called in presence of Thakur Kamta Singh in connection with the fact that deceased Jhalla cut down the wire of Appellant/accused. Thakur Kamta Singh tried his level best to solve the dispute but accused/Appellant Rampal and Lala Choudhary were not agreed. Then Thakur Kamta Singh proceeded towards his home. At this juncture, Appellant Rampal and co-accused Ramnath, Chunkai, Sarman, Guddi, Lala and Rakesh Choudhary assaulted complainant Jhalla by axe, lathi and stone. Complainant Jhalla and Rambharan, Rakesh, Sampat Choudhary got injured. F.I.R. (Ex. P-32) was lodged by complainant Jhalla. Injured were sent for medical examination. Complainant Jhalla was died during treatment.

A marg intimation (Ex. P-35) was registered. Dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Dr. Alok Khanna (P.W.9) performed the autopsy on the body of deceased Jhalla and opined that cause of death was due to coma as a result of intra cranial bleeding and injury to brain. He prepared post-mortem report(Ex.P-28).

During investigation Appellant and co-accused were arrested and after usual investigation Appellant along with other co-accused was charge-sheeted.

Learned trial Court framed the charges against the Appellant/accused under Sections 148, 302/149, 323/34 (5counts) of I.P.C.

The Appellant and co-accused abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence.

After appraisal of evidence on record and after completing the trial, learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all co-accused along with Appellant to the charges leveled against them but Appellant was convicted under 304 Part II of IPC and sentenced as mentioned herein above. Hence, this appeal.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that looking to the evidence on record, he is not challenging the conviction recorded by the trial Court. He further submitted that Appellant was in jail from 25.1.2005 to 13.5.2005 total 109 days and since 28.9.2006 to till today which is near about 4 and half years and after counting remission it would be approximately 5 years. In these circumstances, end of justice would be met out if he be sentenced for jail sentence already undergone and fine of Rs. 1000/-.

Learned Counsel for the State has formally objected to the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the Appellant.

Considering the period of custody which is approximately 5 years and nature of offence committed by Appellant, I am of the view that end of justice would be met out if Appellant be awarded the jail sentence already undergone.

In these circumstances, appeal is partly allowed. Conviction recorded by trial Court against the Appellant u/s 304 Part II of I.P.C. is hereby affirmed and the sentence is altered in the following way:

Appellant is sentenced, to jail sentence of already undergone(approximately 5 years) and fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine further Simple Imprisonment for 3 months.

Record of the trial Court be sent back along with the copy of judgment for compliance and necessary action.