Judgment 20/07/2017 This appeal has been preferred on behalf of accused- appellant Chain Singh assailing judgment dated 23rd March, 2013 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) cases Jhalawar, whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under section 327 and 326 ipc. He has been awarded the sentence of one year and two years Rigorous Imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and 7,000/- for the aforesaid offences respectively. In default of payment he is ordered to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month and two months respectively. Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.
Heard learned counsel who has been appointed by Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority for representing the accused and also learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the judgment impugned and the evidence available on record.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no (2 of 3) [CRLA-745/2013] sufficient evidence to hold the accused guilty for the offences charged against him PW-2 Ramesh Chand, PW-3 Banwari Lal have completely turned hostile, whereas PW-5 Ramprasad is partially hostile. Impugned judgment suffers from serious infirmity and is liable to be quashed and set aside. He thus prays that the appeal may kindly be allowed.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. His submissions is that the judgment impugned is perfectly in accordance with the evidence available on record. Hence, the appeal may kindly be dismissed.
I have scanned the judgment impugned in light of the evidence available on record as also the arguments advanced by both the sides. Complainant and injured PW-1 Hazarilal has affirmed the incident stating that accused Chain Singh demanded Rs.10 from him. On his refusal he abused him. When he reached near the bridge of Churely, the accused stabbed him by knife in his right side. He lodged the report Ex.P1. He was medically examined. His blood stained cloths were seized vide Ex.P3. It is pertinent to note that nothing adverse has come out in his cross- examination.
The statement of PW-1 Hazarilal gets corroborated by the evidence of PW-7 Dr. Mangilal Meena who examined the complainant and prepared his MLR Ex.P7 Dr. Mangilal found stabbed wound of the size of 1.8cm x 0.8cm x peritonium deep.
Stabbed wound was found to be griveous in nature and caused by sharp edged weapon. PW-9 Arvind Kumar and PW-10 Dhara Singh have affirmed the recovery of knife vide Ex.P10 at the instance of (3 of 3) [CRLA-745/2013] accused Chain Singh from the almirah placed in his residential house. FSL report Ex.P6 mentions that on the knife and blood stained cloths seized by the police during investigation, human blood was detected. This oral and documentary evidence proves the incident narrated by PW-1 Hazarilal in his report Ex.P1.
PW-4 Jamnalal, who his brother of injured Hazarilal, also affirms the alleged incident. Information was given by Hazarilal to him just after the incident took place. Then he took his brother for medical examination. The incident has been partially supported by PW-5 Rampratap also.
In light of the above evidence, the conclusion arrived at by learned trial Court in the judgment impugned appears to be logical and convincing. The accused has been held guilty for the offence under Section 326 in place of charge framed under Section 307 IPC. Looking to the nature of injury and its gravity, the conviction for the offence under Section 326 IPC appears to be proper.
Learned counsel for the accused-appellant could not indicate any evidence which is contrary to the conclusion arrived at by learned trial Court.
In view of whatever stated above, I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the judgment impugned. In the result, the appeal is dismissed while upholding the judgment dated 23rd March, 2013.
(DEEPAK MAHESHWARI)J.
Arun/36
Comments