Partly allowed

Jethu Ram v. the State of M.P.

Chhattisgarh HC2 Sept 2008CRA/1966/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellant's appeal against conviction for attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC). The court reclassified the offense to voluntarily causing grievous hurt (Section 326 IPC) and reduced the sentence to three years of rigorous imprisonment.

What did the court decide?

Conviction altered from Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC; sentence reduced to three years rigorous imprisonment.

Jethu Ram Vs the State of M.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2008)

¶1

HE§H CGUR? f3? CHHAm$Q£RH $ILASPUR

¶2

Crimémi #ammai Na.19&6 a? 1g9§ A P ELLANT: Jeé‘umm!h 5/0 Rama Nishad, aegd abou? 35 n. -.. in] mi” ) year'$, R/é Wiage Arkar, P.S._ €Lirw, Disfi Burg , MP. {n ew C5 .) Versus RESPONDEN T: The S‘M‘I'e of Madhya Wadesh {aow ’i’hr‘cugh €hha‘7‘7‘is’gar’r‘a}, Sfafic’n Erycharga, R.5 aurur, mm. awfg, My. {n ow w .) {Cgrimim apgaa! under- Sacfion 374 sf fhe Coed of Criminai Procedure, 1973} =:;:= K I £ Pre‘rmsa ‘ K r. rxB Agrawai, Senior i1.dvaca're wi‘rh Mr. C.K. Sahu . Advocm‘e for The A .. anheH an’r. Mr. Quvimad Agrawai, Panei Lawyer“ fer The Sfn‘fe/resoradaw‘ p Sinaie Bzmh : ' Hanbki .w.‘ T.P. Shawna. J. GRAL §L3D$M§NT “ (agiwgrarj^9n2" 52g?z?$bg,r 293)8 T45$3 apgeaé is d iram’ed agains? i‘ha jugman‘rd of colavic‘rim and orerd 0f m :a'gni'agrnc da‘rgé EiQwlgéL—g :asm"s by é'hg 5 A=idii’ iam§ $2<<Lan< .Tmigz , ‘ b».ur , m Sassic a s Hid No.3 U1 $93 w§¢eraby idaame Adi‘rionad3 $essions Judea 9 aterf hisdirsg 1215: agzfjéian‘r guii'z‘y^{fercommEsianooffenca} fé‘^under Sec'rian 3 07 of^“me I.P.C. , sen‘renced him To unergGd RI. for six years. 2. Th e imgugnad Jugmeafd^isckaingeé k^onfhe gmund^{1‘hcd'wH‘hou?(myevience} d gr/lma fada su‘fficien’? for gonvic‘l'ion, $wmed Triai Cour? has coavicfed and ,. -« sdergirznce fh e agg?eiian‘ V »/ y )r. ( E ha.w mam? §e&mad coaase i far fhe aiiar‘es and nvuesed ‘tha iued'mgm jud§mam¥^{{asais‘afi’xarecwdof”theTriaiCourt}

¶3

jawsecwian, §n brief, is é‘i‘m we ap'gegw‘i‘ and compbincmiV injured §amshmm £PW4§^are naighbwr$ and They are rasidem‘s of Viiiage Arkar. Q'n "the mire of z cEdem‘ La $—5—1993 a‘!’ abou‘? 7" am” wife of i'he ‘G ameiim? 5g Mfg offme wan tainam wera guarreimg wi‘rh each when A?^{‘a‘hcd.’} ‘kime we camglaihcmf was swing “w fake bwmg ha in‘rer’vened in^‘s‘he qaarrei^anti wiedi To s'mp bofh {he woman, i‘inzn a”? appeHcm‘r came and assauWed^“ha campiain‘anf WWI women plankm mcksida a? Ws head, The ccmpiaimnf^”M? a’atmu^‘ and bgcama umnmcéoas‘ Firgmn he was sM'F‘red ‘ra his hausg and ‘Theram‘wr, *m P§Eice Smfian Gwuiz whare he J’odged “fhe FER. Vida EXP-12.‘ Qn vi; basis: of Tim FIR EXP—13,2, izumbared FER. was regiskred viaie §X.P— 13. Tha injurad was sew? “F02" madicni axammm'ion To Primary Heca31’h Gama. Gurut Vida E:<.?5’A‘ w§zere §’1e was exczmmad by Dr. KL. Bhandarkar {PW£:} Vida Ex.P~§a. ‘ The doc’mr ”found foié'ewing iajuries of}^‘fhz boiiy, 0‘? Ganesh Ram: * ’rhz (a) Lacem‘rw wwnd in $ize sf 3:? Cms. X. 1 cm. x if cm. an lef? fare head: (ii)^Lacgrm‘ed weuad {irra§a3ar) a the size of S cms. X 1 cm. x % cm. on middle of $kLi§§ more near^‘fha ie‘xT parie‘mi region; & (iii)^Biwxcwgh {iecoiourism’im on §efT iower eye iid.

¶4

¶5

X-r‘ay 93am EXP-18 <34 X—ray reggox'a‘ EXP-19 reveé? ‘fha‘r There is iMear freeswre 0‘? parie'mi bone Piam so§i 3g b§00d swirled 50H were seized from ‘rhe b pSace^ofaeaurrence and cio‘mes were seize€ fram The comgmimm' vide EX.P-l. ,m ShLe map mi The gzuce mi ocwrreme wee pregared by Tee Eeve§€gafing GWicer vii‘ie EXP-2‘ The appeilan‘r ems ‘kaken im‘o cusfociy and he mede J3 é§scm$ure sm‘remen‘? reiefing 1": wmm'en piank xzide ExP-Ez anti fhe said woodeir? avian?^{wasretailer-ed} a? {he ins? ace a“? ?%e apyeiiarzi vide EXP»? Rczmmcha was recorded vide EXP—1TH.

¶6

Aiwr recordmg %§fie si'a'fame'v^'3'3 undar Sac?§on 161 of^'Hqe CnP‘Ca, and mare? cam;3a?iew of imesriga?iom charge giaae“? Ms men fiied befm‘e We Judicia? Magsfrm‘ai Firs? (Has; Babd, whc m *um, ccmmi‘fwd ‘i'ha case #0 ‘?‘fse Cam“? ‘Q m‘ Sessigms Judge, burg, fwm Wham lgamgd E“ ££§di?i0rzai‘5ass§§n$ Jurjg-a, ‘Duvgg fhe casa m^‘fmnsfer for Wink

¶7

. 3r ordar^‘re es‘ira b'. h, Tha guii‘t x3“?^‘ihz apjgeHan‘r, fhe gymsecu'ricrs has ammimci as mcmy as 12 wHnesses. S‘hszxi'emen? 9f f‘nz uccused/apgeémm has beerw y rkc‘rgrded' um‘ar Seam: 3:3 a? Tha Cr.P.C. 'm w§1ich 31a denied fha cwcamsmnces agapeér’mg agaias‘f him! pleaded innocence. and faise imp§icaf§an Ha {ms aisa mkgn #he éefgma^‘Fha’f fae camphimm‘ Kcxs friai Ta enfmga “Fm: meciesfy of Hs wife mcil M Ems iodgeti The repcrai ffhe^compQaimm' is having inimiwi farms wifh The appaikm‘? and <3$ a r'esui‘l' of enmiw he has baa; éminiktawd faiseiy‘

¶8

Mr. H3. Agrawai... iear‘ned Senior Ativomm appearing on behtzif of fhe apga§iam?_, argued T§mf no eyewifness has 5:391: The ecwrrema, ‘?he cempiainan? himsaif hgs m1“ s?a‘?e:;’ 141a? he is bearer? by whm‘n. Seized am‘icies were n9? examimd by^4mg chemicai exigerr?^“m canned fhe ar’i’icies wifh The: mime in 9 ques+ion En iha absence m“ my mgdiw§ and ra3iab% evideace, espaciaéiy when ”(he apgge§§anf is émving imz’mml} farms wifh :fha compminaa? & ws famiiy, ‘fha case gigging? fhg aggelian’? Ms no? bean gnroved' by fine pmsecu‘rion beyond a.” masmabie cf doubfs.

¶9

.r:\ On ‘s‘he owe? haad: ‘ri’aa jud’gmen‘r is suppeWed on hem}? of The Shaw/i respandam‘ ané i? §s saEmé‘H'ed fha‘:^‘mg grosecm‘mn has provad i‘rs case by adducing cogen‘i‘ and riziiabie ewdwée.

¶10

’3‘ k, ,

¶11

¶12

‘é‘he ’r’na 9. As regard$ iiaJury caused' by appabn‘? an comniainanf §aneshmm (Earaashmm (:3W-l) has siru‘i'ed Thai: he raceéved imurv over back side 51" his head and fell dawn uncenscious. §e$karbai {PW-2) - wife of ‘9aneshmm; ‘G Sae‘Mmm Wkly—3), sQn 0‘? GamesWmm (Kg^Chho‘miai {PWw43^{mwesupaor‘l‘aa‘fha} 'E’Ie. injuries of campiaimwir. The comgiaimn“? was exam§nad by Dr. KL. Bhaym‘arkar IP‘Al-6§ who fmmd mjmes: as sm‘red aiacve, ovar his body. Dr. v.5. Qaghei {PW-12) kw cwducfzé X-ray and feand iinear^"fracfure Qf parie‘mi bime v§de X—mv mam Ex‘Prw and X—r'av rencrf EXP-19. V^.

¶13

in viaw of fhe abcve acuiar and med§wi evidence. i'r is esi’abiished ?ha"r GT^'Hqe ‘r’ne 1'ime 0f inciden‘f, comniaimn? raceivea‘ injury over his head whmim was grievous^innufure.

¶14

As regards^“ma comgéicii‘v 9f^‘rhe abnaiicm‘rⁱⁿ fhe crime if; ques?iam Qaaaskmm

¶15

{PW-1}, whe^§§'3'h‘a comgiamm‘r,^{hassm‘i‘ecimhisevidence'i'hcn‘on‘i'hafa‘re‘fui} dav^‘ihe (iiaEu‘ie was: piace beiwean his wife and fhe aoneiiaa‘i‘s wife:^hawen? f'a reSghie The mai‘igr' and The appeiian? assuui‘red him from backside wiih waoden gaimik as a resui‘s‘ of which he faii dawn^{unconscicus,Thar’eas'er,hewas} taken To The Poiica Sia‘?iani Keshcrbai (WV-2)^{iswifeofThecomniainan‘i.} Shz 3 has sfahad iii her avidencz^{‘ihn‘i‘} she heard ihe crie§%f The^{appelian‘iThai“he} has kiiied, i'hen she came oui' and saw Thai ihe appeiiani was^{assaui'i'ingher} husi‘vcmd wiih wsode'a piwk, biocd was coming oui’ from fine injury of he? husband. ,r‘x

¶16

Sagiamm Law—3; san a”)? Eaneshmm (3:,^Chhoi'uiai {PW-4)^wereaiso prasea‘i‘^0a The giace of; ecwr‘rence. Eae‘i‘amm £9W-3‘}, soa oi: ganashmm. has s‘tai'ed in his zvia‘sncs^'i’acd' whim he hearé The cries of Eaweshi‘am. he^came au‘i from ihe House, a? ihaf iime. Ganeshenam ieii domm^{andbecameuaconscisus.} The

¶17

ap§e3§am^{wasrmwmgfromfhe} ghee^{a?agcuwenceandhewasmiciingwaoden} yie‘ak Chha‘miai gPW—ll)^{aisasm'mdinh§sav'idgnce“mm“hesawfheappe§§anf} *rhccl‘ he has assaui’rad running from W‘ha scene^{ofoccurrzncaghewassuyiag} ‘G 'm ‘i‘c #he spo‘l', he‘saw Ganesh gumshr‘am. When This‘wi‘rness {PW-4)^reached injured^{condi‘fionandbioodwasoozingou‘rof“theinjury.}

¶18

“fine 13. Nérendra^Kumm- {PW—5) has s‘m‘ed m his evidence^{Tharheheardfhaf} appeiim‘l‘i‘^{hasassaui‘i'edGaneshmm;bu‘ihehasno?seem‘iheincidem'.} He has bee‘h‘ ‘deciared hosiiie by theA prosecuiien anti he has no? suppari‘ed^*{hecase of ifqe prosecu‘iion. v¢ ~ 14. Ganeshr'cam (lPWmlj^{idesadmi'rfedinhiscross—examimfionf'ho‘i'hehasno?seen} as To who^{hosbedienhim!becausei1ewasassaui‘i’edorifbocksicle.} He has^oiso admi‘h’ed ‘i’ha‘i The appeiiam' and his wife have iodged report ogains? him reia‘iing^{"i0om‘mg‘mgfhemodesi'yof'iheoppeilam'swife.} He has^{deniedi‘ha‘;} on i'he ground^{ofehmi'i'y,hehaslodgedfaiserepori'agaihs‘iiheappeiicm‘i.} He has also denied^{iha'?hereceived} injury^dueiofaii an ‘ihe ground. He has admi‘r‘ied^{inhiscross-examinai'ienpara11iha‘iai‘‘iheTimeofquarreibefween} presen‘i'^on“ihe his wife &^{wifeofTheaepeiian‘i',} persons^{offhevicini‘iywere} & spm". Kesharbai (PW—2'),^{wifeofcompiaimni6anesh’f‘him;hasaisoadmii’iedin} her cross—exomina’rion para^{7‘i’ha‘i‘shecameou‘iafwrhearingihecriesof‘i‘he} appeiian‘i’.

¶19

. Therefore,^fromThe pefusal^{ofTheevidenceafGaneshmm(IDW—i'),} i‘i‘ aepear‘s ‘rhm‘ he was assauifed on his back porriion^{ofheadandhefeiidown.} There^is no scope f0?"^{secondorihir’d} assaui‘i. Bu? fhree^{injurieswerefouhdon‘rhe} ‘i'ha'i' i‘he injury over fron‘? side oi‘ body of^{'ihecomplainant} This fac'i^shows ie'i‘i iower^{eyeiidwasasaresuh‘offaiiing} his head^{andbiacknessbeiowi‘he}

¶20

¶21

down. He received omx/ one injury as a resui? af The assauh‘ mic}^‘i’hcw was on his back side of head aT pmefa! region. He has syecificaiiy grand^“rim? he was assaui‘red by The appeiian‘i'. bu? m cross—examinm‘ion he has sm‘reti Tha‘f ‘G 'i'he assQUH was made from backside, Thai is why he was no? abie i'o eee as TO who has assauiTed him, buT he has noT said anyThing ThaT The aopeiianT has noT assau§‘;‘ed him.

¶22

According To Kesharbai {PW-2'),^{sheheardThesound} of^'ihe appeiiaml ihen g she‘ came ouT and saw ThaT The aooeiian‘i was assauiTina hen husband wiTh wonder: piahk,^same is sugporfeci by See‘i’aram (PW-3), sch of §cneshmm ¢& Chhc‘iuiai (PW-{i who came near ihe incidenf and saw^‘ihe appeiiani' ruhning wi‘ih wooden piank. These fac’rs are inferreia‘ied and .suf’ficien‘i’^“for drawing“ihe ‘i'he inference Thai anneiiam' oaiv has causeci injury on ihe eerson of compicximm' and he assauh'ed The comniaimni' wii’h wooden Diank over his headl fhereby he has caused grievous injury To the compiainsn‘i.

¶23

l7. As regards The quesTion ThaT wheTher‘ The injurv caused by The appeiia‘ni‘ on The ’ro gerSOn^{offhecampinimn‘i‘} was dangerous iife and fine cppeiiam‘ asscuh‘ea‘ Ting compiainan'i' wiTh inTenTion To cause his deai'h, The appeiian‘i’ has infiicTed oniy a sinqie injury on The compiainanf and min away, in spifé‘i‘o‘? having opporTuniTy To repeaT The blow and cause some more assaui‘rs. The compiainan‘i‘ had Tried To ouTrage The modesTy of The appeiianT‘s wife, as a resuiT 0f which, The apneiiahT showing annoyance caused The said injury on The compiainanT. This shows ThaT The appeiianT has noT caused any iniurv wiTh inTenTion To kiii or commiT The deai‘h of The compiainam‘. BUT in‘i‘en‘i‘ion or’ knowiedqe cah be inferred from The naTure of injury, parT of body over which The injury was caused and The weapon used by The apoeiianT. This shows ThaT The aopeiianT was having knowiedae ThaT by

¶24

23 “m

¶25

¶26

causing injury wifh woaderl piank over^’rhe heaci of fha camvlainant he may cause severe assaul‘r or if may he dangerous 1'0 fhe iifg of fhe cormaiainan‘i'. The avidence aciducad on beinaif of {he prosecu‘rion is suf‘fkien‘? To draw infema‘nce fha‘? The Ggpaliam‘ has caused‘ grievous injury 1‘0 The campia’incmfi Q with wooden gaiank^which is a dangerous weapon. The ac? of fhe abbeiian’r seuareiv^‘Faiis uncias Secfion 326 of fhe IP‘C. Afier eppreciai'img fhe evidence avaiiabie on recard, iearned friai Cour-T has convic‘l‘eci The appeiian'i' under Sec‘rion 307 of^“rhe I.,P.Ci and senfenceci him i0 undergo RI. for six years, bu? i'i‘ has mi coosidered ’rhe r idkéumsmnces and^'r'he case of singie oiow.

¶27

In View of ihe reasons, Tire appeai is oar-“Hy ajiowed. Convic‘iion of firm foregoing

¶28

agapeilon? under Seo'iion 307 of fine I.P.C. is se‘i-osicie and he is acqui'r‘ieci of i‘i7e said charge instead Thereof-g he is convic’ied under Seé’fi'on 32o of^‘ihe I.P.C. and‘ semenced fo undergo RI. for fhree years. He shaii be enfi'iied' for se‘i off for

¶29

ihe oeriod aiready undergone by him.

¶30

'5
T. P. Sharma
Judge‘

Jethu Ram v. the State of M.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jethu Ram v. the State of M.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

Suresh Kumar Vs Kushal Das and Anr.

Anup Kumar Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Manik Biswas and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Boda Ram @ Ramdhar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Paklu Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanat Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh