Partly allowed

Ram Janam and Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Aug 2019CRLA/2022/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 323/34 IPC. Substituting the imprisonment sentence with a fine of Rs.1,000/- plus one week additional imprisonment in default, directing payment of compensation to the victim. Disposed of the appeal after finding that appellants were acquitted of more serious charges and had suffered long pendency.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of rigorous imprisonment substituted with fine of Rs.1,000/- plus one week additional imprisonment in default; Rs.2,000 compensation directed to be paid to victim.

Ram Janam and Others Vs State of U.P. — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2022 of 2003

¶4

Appellant :- Ram Janam And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Kirtikar Pande,Subhash Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶6

This appeal under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by convicts appellants Ram Janam, Shyam Lal, Purshottam (abated due to death of convict appellant) and Sunnar Yadav against judgment of conviction and sentence made therein, dated 01.05.2003, passed by Additional Session Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Ghazipur, in S.T. No. 225 of 1994 (State Vs. Ram Janam & others), under Section 323/34 I.P.C., wherein a sentence of nine months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- each and in default one and half months additional imprisonment, has been awarded.

¶7

Learned counsel, for appellants, argued that convict appellant Purshottam died during pendency of this appeal. Other three convicts appellants are more than 50 years of age. They have been convicted vide judgment dated 01.05.2003 and they were of no criminal antecedent. The maximum sentence is of nine months with fine of Rs.1,000/-. The occurrence was of 02.10.1993 i.e. for more than 26 years, they are with mental agony. They have been acquitted of the offence levelled under Sections 304, 504 I.P.C. and have been convicted and sentenced for offence under Section 323 I.P.C. only. Appeal on conviction is not being pressed, rather only sentence is being disputed and a mercy petition for converting sentence into fine is being made. Hence, this old year appeal of 2003 be decided by awarding fine only.

¶8

¶9

Learned A.G.A. could not oppose above factual aspect that occurrence was of 02.10.1993 and trial was for offence punishable under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., but prosecution failed to prove charge for offence punishable under Section 304, 504 I.P.C., for which convicts appellants have been acquitted and there is no appeal by State against judgment of acquittal for those offences. This is the only appeal for judgment of conviction for offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for both sides and gone through impugned judgment and material placed on record, it is apparent that a report on 02.10.1993 at about 6.30 A.M. was got lodged by informant Sarju Singh Yadav stating therein that his son Ashok Kumar Yadav along with Ram Bachan Singh Yadav and cousin Chandrika Singh Yadav was present at his door, when his pet get eased at the door of neighbour Ram Janam. Shyam Lal Yadav became furiated and give assault to above pet. This was protested by informant that pet is animal having no rational, but Shyam Lal became abusive and when this was protested, Ram Janam Yadav, Shyam Lal, Purshottam Yadav and Sunnar Yadav came in front of door of informant along with their lathies and they assaulted informant and those who intervened. Chandrika and Ashok Kumar were badly injured. Ram Janam gave a blow by leg over the abdomen of Ram Bachan Singh Yadav. Upon this hue and cry, Chandra Dev Yadav, Junkhi Ram and many others rushed on spot and they intervened. Accused persons ran from spot. Ram Bachan became faint on spot. He was instantly taken to police station, but he succumbed to injuries. The report was got lodged and the same was investigated, resulting submission of charge sheet and taking of cognizance over it. As offence punishable under Section 304 I.P.C. was exclusively triable by Court of Sessions, hence this file was committed to Court of Sessions, where charge for offence

¶11

¶12

punishable under Sections 304/34, 323/34, 504 I.P.C. were framed against persons, who pleaded not guilty and claimed for their trial.

¶13

Prosecution examined informant PW-1 Sarju Singh Yadav, PW-2 Ashok Kumar Yadav, PW-3 Dr. V.S. Tripathi, PW-4 Dr. S.J. Verma, PW-5 S.I. Indrajeet Singh and PW-6 Constable Munnilal. Accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied accusation and said that evidence were incorrect. Trial court passed impugned judgment of conviction for offence punishable under Section 323/34 I.P.C. and judgment of acquittal for offence punishable under Sections 304, 504 I.P.C.

¶14

A plea of probation was claimed before trial court, but this was not accepted by trial Judge and the reasoning for nonacceptance was that accused persons gave assault by lathi over three unarmed persons, resulting death of one of them. Meaning thereby, there is judgment of acquittal for non-proof of accusation on one side and taking of same under consideration, while rejecting claim of probation. This itself shows a contrary view. The occurrence is of year 1993 and judgment is of 01.05.2003. Pendency of this appeal till 2019 reveals that for more than 26 years, convicts appellants are under mental agony. The offences levelled were not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, there was judgment of acquittal for offence punishable under Section 304, 504 I.P.C., but no State appeal is there for above judgment of acquittal and the only appeal is against conviction for offence of simple hurt, punishable under Section 323 I.P.C., which provides maximum sentence of one year or with fine up to Rs.1,000/- or with both.

¶15

Hence, under above facts and circumstances and the previous incarceration of one and half months in this case, this appeal merits its judgment with conviction and sentence of period undergone with fine of Rs.1,000/-.

¶16

¶17

8. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

¶18

The sentence awarded by trial Court is being substituted as fine. Convicts appellants Ram Janam, Shyam Lal and Sunnar Yadav are being sentenced with period already undergone and fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default, one week's additional imprisonment under Section 323/34 I.P.C. with a direction for payment of Rs.2,000/- to victim as compensation, as awarded by trial Judge.

¶19

Let a copy of this judgment along with lower court's record be sent back to the court concerned for immediate compliance and necessary action.

¶20

Order Date :- 26.8.2019 NS

Ram Janam and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Janam and Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aas Mohammad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Veer Pratap Singh @ Veeru @ Bhim Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Shakib Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Anamika Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Shankar Prasad @ Jugunu Vs State of U.P.

State of U.P. Vs Shiv Narayan and Othres