Partly allowed

Ram Avtar Yadav v. Prabhudayal and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC1 Dec 2014CRA/174/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the High Court altered the conviction of respondents from Section 323/34 IPC to Section 324/34 IPC of the IPC. The court held that the trial court committed illegality by using the wrong section for injuries caused with sharp-edged weapons used in common intention.

What did the court decide?

The conviction of respondents No. 1 and 2 under Section 323/34 IPC is altered to Section 324/34 IPC. They are sentenced to undergo imprisonment and a fine.

Ram Avtar Yadav Vs Prabhudayal and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

APPELLANJ COMPLAINANT

¶2

Ram Avtgl ¥adav , agmi^abow45 years,^{S/oLatgShriSachhuPra$ad} Yadav, cccgpgtim wultivationi P.S. Chagali , R/o Village Rgnhat, District Surguja (CG).

¶3

VERSUS

¶4

RESPQNDENTS:

¶5

Prabhudayal $/ o Chamglrn
Yadav, aged about 35 years,
accupation cultivation, R/ o
Village Ranhat, RS. Chalgal L
Dishict Surguja (CG),
Ramdayal Sr/ o Chatuggm
Yadav, aged 32 ygam
gccupatiog cuhivaticn, R/ 9
Village Ranhax, P.$. Chalgah,
District Surguja (CG).
( Accusgd Persons )
The State of Chhatti§garh,
thfrmggh the StaJiQn Eggse
(mica, Police Statian ChalgaH,
Districtlam“ Surg. Vja (CG).

¶6

EROCEBURE

¶7

Cr.A.No.174 of2011 Page 1 of4

¶8

¶9

1 g

¶10

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.T.P.SHARMA^& HON’BLE MR.I.S.UBOWEJA, JJ.

¶12

Criminal Appeal No.174 of 2011

Ram Avtar Yadav

Appellant

Versus Respondents 1. Prabhudayal 2. Ramdayal

te fChhattisgarh

OF THE Cr.P.C.)

:S .A.Ansari, counselforzthe appellant.

¶21

m Dixit, counsel fore

¶22

No.1 and 2.

¶23

Ms Pushpa Dwived i e r for respondent No.3/State. U DGMENT (^P 1 St'DeECember, 2014)

¶24

T.P.Sharma, J.:-

¶25

By this acquittal appeal^under proviso^{toSection372oftheCr.P.C.the} appellant has challenged the^legalityand propriety^ofthe judgment^of acquittal dated 8.10.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Pratappur, in S.T.No.115/10,^wherebythe trial Court while acquitting respondents No.1^{and2ofthechargeofSection307/34has} convicted them under Section 323/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RJ. for^one month^{andtwenty-twodaysandfineofRs.1000/-,} in default of payment of fine^{tofurtherundergoR.l.fortwomonths.}

¶26

As per case of prosecution,^{onaccountofuseofcolouruponwife.of} respondent No.1 Prabhudayal at the time^{ofHolifestival,respondents} No.1 and 2 were unhappy and having motive against complainant Ramavtar. On 28.9.2009 at^about6 p.m.^{whilehewascomingbyhis}

¶27

Cr.A.N0.174 of 2011 Page 2 of 4

¶28

motor-cycle, respondents No.1 and 2 were holingd axe^& sword^and caused injures upon head o€ injured Ramavtar Yadav (PW-1),^who rushed to his house, thereafter^{hewenttoPoliceStationPratappurand} lodged the F.I.R. in Crime No.0/19^{videEXP/2,fromwherehewassent} to Community Health Centre, Pratappur for his examination vide EXP/16, he was examined by Dr.N.P.Singh (PW—4) (second PW—4) vide Ex.P/9 and found following injuries:i (i) Incised wound over back of the head of 3x1 1/2 cm. (ii) Incised wound over left side of head^of 4x1 1/2 cm.

¶29

The injured was referred to Ambikapur hospital^{forfurthertreatment.} ‘ Finally, F.l.‘R. w e Station Chalgali vide EXP/35. ........... ..... ” e d ys.^{Hisbed—headticket} oodstained clothes of the i j reseized vide Ex.P/1. Ex.P/17. During Was taken into custody, he made d e nt of axe vide Ex.P/5 and^same was recovered at j vide Ex.P/4. Respondent No.1 Prabhudayal made discl estatement of knife^like sword^videEx.P/6 ‘ -‘ and same was recover tance vide Ex.P/3. Statements of the recorded under Section 161 of the “Code’). Code of Criminal Pro o r short After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed^{before‘theJudicialMagistrateFirst} Class, Pratappur, who in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Surguja (Ambikapur), from where the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.),^{Pratappurreceivedthecaseontransferfortrial.} ln order to prove the guilt of^{theaccused/respondentsNo.1and2,the} prosecution^{hasexaminedasmanyassevenwitnesses.Theaccused} were examined under Section^{313oftheCr.P.C.} in which they denied the circumstances appearing^{againstthemandclaimedinnocenceand} false implication in the^crimein question.

¶30

After providing opportunity^{ofhearingtothe} parties,^{thetrialCourtwhile} acquitting respondents^{No.1and2ofthechargeofSection307/34has}

¶31

Cr.A.No.174 of2011 Page 3 of 4

¶32

¶33

convicted them under Section 323/34 of the IPC and sentenced as aforementioned.

¶34

We have heard learned counsel for^the parties, perused^the judgment impugned and record of the^trialCourt.

¶35

Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that as per evidence of injured Ram Avtar Yadav (PW-1)^{andDr.N.P.Singh} (PW—4) (second^{PW-4),twoincisedwoundshavebeencausedontheheadof} injured Ramavtar Yadav and breath of^{incisedwoundwas1} 1/2 cm., but the trial Court has mentioned the breath^as 1/2 cm. The trial Court has held that two incised wounds have been caused by sharp edged

¶36

O n the other ha n i Lawyer for respondent No.3/State formally opposed the

¶37

1. Learned counsel for respondents‘ No.1 and 2 opposed^theappealand "e L

¶38

argued that this is ap a thefin‘stance of private party,^TheStatehas chosen not to file a, 4. After appreciating the^evidenceof the prosecution wit i al Court has rightly convicted and sentenced respondents No.1 and 2 as aforementioned. Only on the ground^{oftechnicality,alterationofconvictionofrespondentsNo.1and} 2 could not be proper.

¶39

As per evidence of injured Ramavtar Yadav (PW-1), F.l.R. Ex.P/2, evidence of Dr.N.P.Singh (PW-4) (second^PW—4), injury report EXP/9, sharp edged weapons have been used for causing injury by respondents No.1 and 2 in sharing common intention, which is punishable under Section 324/34 of the IPC and not under Section 323/34 of the IPC.^{WhileconvictingandsentencingrespondentsNo.1} and 2, the trial Court^{hascommittedillegality.}

¶40

. Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed.^{Convictionofrespondents} No.1 and 2 under Section 323/34 of the IPC is hereby altered to Section 324/34 of the^{IPCandconsideringthe} period^{ofdetentionof}

¶41

Cr.A.No.174 of2011 Page4 0f4 .

¶42

respondents No.1 and 2, nature of injuries and pendency of trial, they are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period already undergone by them and tine of Rs.4000/— each, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.l. for three months. in case of payment of fine of Rs.1000/— each, they are entitled for adjustment and required to pay remaining fine of Rs.3000/—each within 60 days from today before the

¶43

trial Court.

¶44

5d]— Sdllnder Singh Uboweja Sharma 11?. i Judge ludge

Ram Avtar Yadav v. Prabhudayal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Avtar Yadav v. Prabhudayal and Ors.

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

Keshri Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

S.K. Khwaja and Anr. Vs State

Ajay Pandey since Dead Through Lrs. and Ors. Vs Registrar Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Arang and Ors.

Fulchand Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amola Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Komal Sahu Vs Smt.usha Sahu