AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.V. Pinto, J.—These two appeals arise out of common judgment and hence, both are taken up together for the purpose of disposal.
Crl. A. No. 718/07 is filed by the accused challenging his conviction for offence u/s 324 IPC whereas Crl.A. 1760/07 is filed by the Slate seeking-an order of conviction for offence u/s 307 and 504 r/w Section 34 IPC in S.C. No. 289/04.
The City Fast Track Court No. IV passed the judgment dated 28th March. 2007 in S.C. No. 289/04 convicting the accused for offence u/s 324 IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 3 months, which acquitting him of the offences u/s 307 and 504 r/w 34 IPC.
The facts of the case are to the effect that Veshwanthapur Police filed charge sheet against the accused and two others alleging that on 15.6.03 at about 3.30 p.m., Accused Nos. 1 to 3 assaulted the injured Parashuram by means of hands and by knife on his stomach and thus attempted to cause his murder, thereby they are alleged to have committed an offence u/s 307 r/w Section 34 IPC. It is further alleged that on the said date, place and time, the accused have abused the complainant and other witnesses and thereby they arc alleged to have committed an offence u/s 504 r/w Section 34 IPC.
The prosecution in order, to prove the case has examined in all 14 witnesses, got marked Ex.P.1 to P-10 and produced Mos. 1 to 3. During trial, A-2 and A-3 jumped bail and did not appear before the court and hence, the case against them has been split up and trial proceeded against A-1, the present Respondent.
PW-1 Velliamma is the complainant. She has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. PW-2 Parashuram is injured. He has stated that on 15.6.03 at about 3.30 p.m., when he went to collect his pay from his Maistry nearby Ramaiah Samadhi. He was standing in front of maistry by name Venkatesh. At that time, A-1 to A-3 came and. A-1 Anand stabbed on his stomach and caused grievous injury, while A-2 and A-3 have held him at the time of stabbing. The injured subsequently removed to M.S. Ramaiah hospital and got admitted. He has suited that he can identify the knife by which be was assaulted, by A-1. He has further stated that the other accused assaulted by means of pipes. This witness was cross examined by the defence. PW-3 is Venkatesh and he has also stated that PW-2 was assaulted by A-1. He has also been a witness for Ex.P-2 mahazar.
PW-4 is Mallesha. He has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. PW-5 Ramadas is ASI, Malleshwaram Police Station who has registered the case in Crime No. 288/04 as per Ex.P-1 PW-6 to PW-8 have turned, hostile to the case of the prosecution. PW-9 is Chinnarangaiah who has apprehended the accused and produced him before, the court. PW-10 is C. Nagaraj, Police Constable who has carried the FIR to the Court. PW-ll J.B. Shankarappa, Sub-Inspector of Police at Veshwanthapura police station during the relevant time. He has conducted the investigation in this case. PW-12 Dr. Manjunath has treated PW-2 and he has stated that the injuries on PW-1 are grievous in nature and he has issued Ex.P-7 the wound certificate. PW-13 is PSI who has conducted investigation and PW-14 is an eye witness to the incident but he has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution.
It is from all these evidence the learned Sessions Judge has found A-1 guilty of offence u/s 324 IPC and sentenced him accordingly.
Heard Sri P.M. Navaz, learned Addl. S.P.P. for the State and Sri R. Balaji, for the State and Sri R. Balaji, for the Appellant in Crl.A. 718/07.
Learned Addl. S.P.P. submitted that the evidence of the doctor coupled with the evidence of PW-2 established the offence u/s 307 IPC and therefore, he submitted that the said injury on PW-2 and the weapon used near the neck prove the case against the accused and hence, he prays that the accused may be convicted for offence u/s 307 IPC.
Sri Balaji, learned Counsel for the Appellant on the other hand submits that the finding of the Trial Court is proper and the accused has already undergone two months imprisonment initially. The same would suffice for the offence committed by him, the finding of the Trial Court does not call for interference since there is no material to show that the injured PW-2 has suffered grievous injuries.
After carefully going through the evidence and the submission made by both sides, we are of the opinion that the injuries sustained by PW-2 though seven: there is no evidence to show that they are grievous in nature. Hence, we hold that the conviction. for offence u/s 324 IPC recorded by the Trial Court does not warrant interference. However, in so far as sentence is concerned we are of the view that the injured. PW-2 deserves to be compensated and hence, we pass the following-
ORDER
Crl. A. 718/04 is partly allowed and Judgment convicting the accused for the offence u/s 324 IPC is confirmed and sentence is modified and he is directed to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. The entire amount of fine shall be paid to PW-2 as compensation. The Trial Court is directed to execute the sentence as herein before mentioned.
Crl. A. 1760/07 is dismissed.