Partly allowed

Chhote Lal and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2025CRLA/611/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against conviction and sentence for offences under S.C./S.T. Act and IPC§323, 34, 504. Court held that with injuries being simple and 27 years elapsed, further imprisonment is pointless. Sentence reduced to time undergone; ₹10,000 compensation ordered.

What did the court decide?

Sentence reduced to period undergone; Rs. 10,000 compensation payable to injured or survivors within 45 days.

Chhote Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10315

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 611 of 2008

¶4

Appellant :- Chhote Lal And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- G.S. Pandey,Nishant Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.03.2008 passed by Additional District Judge/F.T.C. Court No. 6, Hardoi by which appellants were convicted and sentenced involved in Session Trial No. 350 of 1999, arising out of Case Crime No. 261 of 1997, under Sections 3(1)(x) of S.C./S.T. Act for a period of one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 400/- each, in case of default of payment of fine to undergo two months simple imprisonment and under Section 323/34 for a period of six months rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs. 200/- each, in case of default of payment of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment and under Sections 504 I.P.C. for a period of one year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 400/- each, in case of default of payment of fine to undergo two months simple imprisonment, Police Station Sandila, District Hardoi.

¶8

Facts in brief are that on 28.12.1997 at about 8 a.m. the informant was coming back from the village Bachita, in the way near the house of Mahadev Das, the appellants met to him and started abusing when objected they made assault with lathi/danda . They also insulted by using words relating to his caste and also threatened to kill. On the same day F.I.R. was lodged as Crime No. 261 of 1997 under Sections 323, 304, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act. The informant was sent for medical examination and medical report was prepared. During medical examination injury on the head and complaint of pain on back and neck was found by the doctor.

¶9

After investigation charge sheet was filed by the I.O. against the appellants under Sections 325/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act.

¶10

Learned trial court framed the charge against the appellants which was read over and explained to the accused person but

¶11

they denied and claimed for trial.

¶12

The prosecution examined P.W. 1, Lalta Prasad; P.W. 2, Vijay Prakash; P.W. 3, Dr. V.P. Singh.

¶13

After conclusion of prosecution evidence statements of appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied the prosecution version and did not adduce any evidence in defence.

¶14

After hearing the arguments for the prosecution as well as the defence, the impugned judgment and order was passed by the learned trial court in which the appellants were convicted and sentenced under Section 323/34 I.P.C, 504 I.P.C. and 3(1)(x) S.C./S.T. Act.

¶15

Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment and order present appeal has been preferred.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that they are innocent and had committed no offence but they have falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the injured person sustained simple injuries on his person those were not fatal to the life. The weapon used in causing those injuries were said to be lathi / danda . There was no any intention or knowledge with the appellants to cause injury to the injured persons.

¶17

Further submitted that the incident took place in the year 1997 and till now 27 years have elapsed. The appellants were young at the time of alleged incident and now they have become old, therefore, no purpose will be served by sending them to jail. There is no any subsequent conduct of the appellants that they had committed similar offence, therefore, request to reduce the sentence as undergone and award compensation to be given to the injured persons since no purpose will be served by sending the appellants in jail.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

¶19

In the case of Ramesh Vs. State of U.P. AIR 1992 S.C. 664 where a single injury was found in the back of the neck of injured, appellant who was tried alongwith two others under Section 307/34 IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years while two other were acquitted, appeal was partly allowed by Hon'ble the Apex Court. His conviction was altered into Section 324 IPC and sentence was reduced to the period already undergone with fine of Rs. 3000/which was to be paid to the complainant as compensation.

¶20

In the case of Merambhai Punjabhai Khachar & Ors vs. State Of Gujarat, 1996 AIR 3236 , there was an attempt to commit murder with fire arm and injury was by a pellet that struck the head, Hon'ble the Apex Court held that Section 307 IPC cannot be held to have been satisfied and conviction was altered to Section 324 IPC.

¶21

In the case of Neelam Bahal and another Vs. State of Uttarakhand 2010 (2) SCC 229 where conviction and sentence of appellant under Section 307 IPC was converted into Section 326 IPC simplicitor. Incident took place in the year 1987 and appellant was about 25 years old. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble the Apex Court, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone by him.

¶22

On considering the facts and submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants, it appears that all the injuries on the person of injured were simple in nature. The weapon used in causing those injuries were said to be lathi/danda . No any injury was fatal to the life of the injured. 27 years have elapsed from the date of incident till now and now they have become old. By sending the appellants to jail no better purpose will be served though awarding compensation in its place may be adequate redressal.

¶23

To sum up the totality of case, in view of the aforesaid observation made by the Apex Court, this Court is of the view that no purpose will be served by sending the appellants to jail but it will be adequate to reduce the sentence as undergone by them and to impose compensation for Rs. 10,000/proportionately that will be paid either to the injured persons or their survivors.

¶24

Accordingly, this appeal is partly allowed and the sentence awarded against the appellant no. 1, Chhote Lal and appellant no. 2, Kisan Pal is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone by them and they are to deposit Rs. 10,000/proportionately before the concerned court within a period of 45 days from today which shall be paid either to the injured or their survivors.

¶25

Trial court record be sent back to the concerned court for compliance.

¶26

Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Suraj Srivastav

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chhote Lal and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhote Lal and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinay Jaiswal @ Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Nafis and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Shrama @ Arjun vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Ram Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Munsrif and Anr. Vs State of U.P.

Satish Kumar Vs State of U.P.