Conviction under Section 307 IPC for a lathi assault on a pregnant woman causing skull fractures and stillbirth was upheld; sentence reduced to period already undergone (about 4 years) with fine enhanced to Rs.40,000 payable to the victim as compensation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:CGHC:25515
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 176 of 2006
Vinod Kumar Tengwar, s/o Sitaram Tengwar, aged about 19 years, r/o Nawagaon, PS Seepat, District-Bilaspur (CG) .. Appellant
versus
The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Seepat, District-Bilaspur
... Respondent
(Cause title is taken from the CIS)
For Appellant : Shri Navin Shukla, Advocate For Respondent/State : Dr Surendra Kumar Dewangan, PL
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Judgment on Board
15.07.2024
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction, and order of sentence dated 19.01.2006 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, CG, in Session Trial-210 of 2005, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the IPC and sentenced RI for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the victim PW1 was having an affair with the appellant. She got pregnancy from the appellant side in the month of July,2004, and the appellant administered some medicine but she could not have got aborted. When the fact of her pregnancy came into knowledge of her family member a Panchayat meet was conducted where the appellant had confessed his guilt and assured that he will
Cra 176 of 2006
2
marry her. On 11.4.2005, at about 7.45PM when the victim was coming back after answering the call of nature along with her mother and sister, the appellant came on the way and assaulted the victim by lathi on her head. By the assault made by the appellant, she received injuries on her head and fell down on the ground. The appellant himself has lodged the report to the police and FIR Ex.P9 was registered against him for the offence under section 307 of IPC. The victim was sent for her medical examination to the primary health center Sipat, where PW7 Dr Rajesh Kumar has examined her and gave report Ex.P7. While examining the victim, the Doctor has noticed the following injuries:
| Sl No | Description |
|---|---|
| 01 | Lacerated wound 2cm x .6cm x .5cm over left frontal head region |
| 02 | Lacerated wound 1 and 1/2cm x .5cm x .5cm over left lateral aspect of orbital region |
| 03 | Bruise (Swelling) (4cm x 3cm) over left orbital region |
| 04 | Lacerated wound (5cm x 1cm x1cm) over left occipital region |
| 05 | Lacerated wound 1 and 1/2cm x .5cm x .5cm over just 1 and 1/2 cm above the 4thinjury mark |
| 06 | Lacerated wound 7cm x .5cm behind the left ear |
| 07 | Lacerated wound 1 and 1/2cm x .4cm over dorsal aspect of middle of the finger (left) |
| 08 | Swelling 4cm x 3cm over dorsal aspect of left hand |
| 09 | Lacerated wound 2 1/2 cm x.5cm x .5cm over right partietal region of head |
| 10 | Swelling 2cm x 1cm over upper lips |
3. The victim was sent for further treatment to the CIMS Bilaspur on being radiologically examined, victim’s parietal bone was found fractured and the report Ex.P14 was given by the doctor PW.11 Dr S Chatterjee.
Cra 176 of 2006
3
The victim was admitted in the Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences, Bilaspur (CIMS Bilaspur) from 12.04.2005 to 25.04.2005, and she delivered a still born child who already died in her womb. One wrapper of medicine has been seized from the mother of the victim vide seizure memo Ex.P2. Blood stained soil and plain soil, broken pieces of bangles, one pair of chappals, and one towel have been seized from the spot vide Ex.P3. Appellant was arrested on 12.04.2005, and a bamboo club was seized from him vide seizure memo Ex.P1. The bamboo club which was seized from the appellant, blood stained soil and plain soil and the towel seized from the spot have been sent for their FSL examination to the State Forensic Science Laboraty, Raipur, from where Report Ex.P18 was received and blood was found on the club, blood stained soil and the towel seized from the spot.
4. Statement of the witnesses under Section 161 CRPC have been recorded and after completion of usual investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC before the learned Jdicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur. The case was committed to the court of learned sessions judge, Bilaspur from where the same has been transferred to the learned trial court for its trial.
5. Learned trial court has framed charge against the appellant for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC. The appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. In order to prove the charge against the appellant, prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses. Statement of the
Cra 176 of 2006
4
appellant has also been recorded under Section 313 of the CRPC in which, he denied the circumstances appearing against him, pleaded innocence, and pleaded that he has been falsely implicated in the case. After considering the evidence produced by the prosecution, learned trial court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him as mentioned in the earlier para of the judgment, hence this appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond any reasonable doubt, there are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. Evidence of the victim, as well as other witnesses, is inconsistent on the material allegations, and therefore, the appellant cannot be convicted for the alleged offence. In alternative, he would submit that the appellant has already remained in jail for more than 4 years. Offence is of the year 2005. Appellant has faced the criminal case for more than 19 years by now. Presently, he is aged about 39 years and having the responsibility of his family. The offence under section 307 of the IPC does not provide for any minimum sentence and therefore the undergone period of the appellant may be considered to be the sufficient sentence for the alleged offence by enhancing the fine amount suitably.
7. On the other hand, learned state counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that from the evidence of prosecution witnesses, guilt of the appellant has duly been
Cra 176 of 2006
5
proved by the prosecution. The appellant caused grievous injuries including fracture of parietal bone of the victim, and she lost her child which makes the offence more grievous. The learned trial court has awarded appropriate sentence for the alleged offence and the nature of allegation against the appellant which cannot be said that appellant requires any leniency in the sentence, therefore, his appeal is liable to be dismissed.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the record.
9. PW1 who is victim in the case has stated in her evidence that she conceived pregnancy from the appellant side and she was having affair with him. A Panchayat meeting was convened in which he confessed his guilt and ready to marry her. After 2-3 days of the said meeting, victim along with her mother and sister had gone to answer call of nature and while coming back from there near the culvert, appellant came on their way and started assaulting her, firstly by hits, fists and kicks. He kicked on her abdomen, and thereafter, assaulted on her head. By the assault made by the appellant, she received injuries on various parts of her body, and she went unconscious. She was admitted to the CIMS Bilaspur, and she remained there for about 21 days. She regained her conscious, only after 9 days.
In cross-examination, she remained firm in saying that she got pregnancy from the appellant and the appellant tried to get her pregnancy aborted. In panchayat meeting he admitted his guilt and after the
Cra 176 of 2006
6
meeting he assaulted her by which she received injuries on her body. She delivered a dead child, who has already died in her womb. Nothing could be extracted from the evidence of this witness that the appellant has not assaulted her and has not caused any injury on her body.
10. The evidence of victim/PW1 has been duly supported by PW2, who is her mother. She too has stated in her evidence that on the date of incident when they were returning back after answering call of nature, on the way appellant came there and assaulted the victim by which she received in juries. She was being taken to the Hospital at Sipat, from where she was shifted to the CIMS, Bilaspur. She has stated that in the Panchayat meeting, the appellant admitted that the victim conceived pregnancy from his side and he is ready to marry with her. Thereafter, he assaulted the victim.
In the cross examination also, the defense could not elicit any material contradiction, so that evidence of this witness can be disbelieved, and she also stated about the entire incident of assault made by the appellant upon the victim.
11. PW9, is sister of the victim, who also accompanied them at the time when the incident took place. She too has stated in her evidence that on the date of incident when they were coming back after answering the call of nature, on the way appellant assaulted the victim by lathi, by which her sister also received grievous injuries on her body. When the appellant was assaulting the victim, she too received one blow of lathi from the
Cra 176 of 2006
7
appellant. This witness has also remained firm in her evidence that appellant has assaulted the victim by lathi by which she received grievous injuries.
12. PW7 Dr Rajesh Kumar, has proved the injuries found on the body of the victim, who gave his report Ex.P7. He stated in his evidence that after examination of the victim, and considering the grievous injuries, she was referred to the CIMS Bilaspur.
13. PW12 Dr Archana Singh, who is posted as Lecturer, Radiology, has stated that she did CT scan of the victim, by which it was found that there is fracture on left occipital, temporal, and right parietal bone of head and also there is swelling on her brain. Her medical report is Ex.P15.
14. Further, PW11 Dr S Chatterjee, who is also posted at District Hospital Bilaspur as Radiologist, has proved the X-ray Report Ex.P14, and stated that on being examination, he found fracture of parietal bone of the victim.
15. PW-13, Dr KK Sao, is the Medical Officer at CIMS, Bilaspur. He stated in his evidence that the victim was admitted at CIMS, Bilaspur on 12.4.2005 and she remained in hospital till 25.4.2005. She delivered a dead child on 12.4.2005. She was complaining less vision of her eyes, for which she was treated by the eye specialist, and she was discharged from the hospital on 25.4.2005. Her medical treatment report is Ex.P.16 and P.17.
Cra 176 of 2006
8
16. From all these evidences, the assault made by the appellant on the victim and grievous injuries made by him on her body has been proved by the prosecution, without any suspicion, and it can be said that the prosecution has proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt.
17. PW4, Jatiram @ Chote Mandal, and PW5, Bisahuram, are the witnesses of Panchayat Meeting, where the appellant has confessed his guilt that the victim has conceived pregnancy from his side.
18. In view of above, this court is also in agreement with the finding recorded by the learned trial court that the appellant is guilty for commission of the offence under Section 307 of the IPC, and the conviction of the appellant for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC is hereby upheld.
19. So far as the sentence for the alleged offence is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant has been arrested on 13.04.2005, and he was released on bail by this court on 07.05.2009, thereby, he already remained in jail for more than 4 years. Offence is of the year 2005, the appellant has already suffered a long tenure of the criminal case, he is presently aged about 39 years and having various responsibilities of his family, therefore the undergone period may be considered to be the sufficient sentence for the alleged offence.
Cra 176 of 2006
9
20. With regard to the sentence part, while dealing with the said question in the matter of Mohammad Giasuddin Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, (1977) 3 SCC 287, it has been observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:
“9. Western jurisdiction and 'sociologists, from their own angle have struck a like note. Sir Samual Romilly, critical of the brutal penalties in the then Britain, said in 1817 : "The laws of England are written in blood". Alfieri has suggested : 'society prepares the crime, the criminal commits it. George Micodotis, Director of Criminological Research Centre, Athens, Greece, maintains that 'Crime is the result of the lack of the right kind of education.' It is thus plain that crime is a pathological aberration, that the criminal can ordinarily be redeemed, that the State has to rehabilitate rather than avenge. The sub-culture that leads to anti-social behaviour has to be countered not by undue cruelty but by re-culturisation. Therefore, the focus of interest in penology is the individual, and goal is salvaging him for society. The infliction of harsh and savage punishment is thus a relic of past and regressive times. The human today views sentencing as a process of reshaping a person who has deteriorated into criminality and the modern community has a primary stake in the rehabilitation of the offender as a means of social defense. We, therefore consider a therapeutic, rather than an in 'terrorem' outlook, should prevail in our criminal courts, since brutal incarceration of the person merely produces laceration of his mind. In the words of George Bernard Shaw : 'If you are to punish a man retributively, you must injure him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and, men are not improved by injuries'. We may permit ourselves the liberty to quote from Judge Sir Jeoffrey Streatfield : 'If you are going to have anything to do with the criminal courts, you should see for yourself the conditions under which prisoners serve their sentences.' “
21. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, and in view of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Giasuddin (supra), the ends of justice would meet, if the sentence awarded to the appellant for the offence under Section 307 of
Cra 176 of 2006
10
the IPC is to be reduced for the period already under by him, with fine of Rs.40,000/-.
22. In view of above, the conviction of the appellant for the offence of Section 307 of the IPC is maintained, however, he is sentenced for the period already undergone by him with fine of Rs.40,000/-. Fine amount shall be paid by the appellant within four months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. In default of payment of fine within the stipulated period, appellant shall further undergo RI for six months.
23. Fine amount of Rs.40,000/-, so deposited by the appellant shall be paid to the victim PW1 as compensation as provided under Section 357-A of the CrPC.
24. With this modification of the sentence, appeal is partly allowed.
25. Appellant is reported to be on bail. His bail bonds shall continue for further period of six months as provided under Section 437-A of the CrPC.
26. Record of the trial court along with copy of this judgment be sent back immediately to the trial Court concerned for compliance and necessary action.
Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE
padma
2 issues framed by the court
Was the appellant guilty of attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC for assaulting the pregnant victim with a lathi?
Should the sentence of 10 years RI be reduced to the period already undergone, with enhanced fine?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mohammad Giasuddin Vs State of Andhra PradeshRelied on¶20
(1977) 3 SCC 287 · Who else cites this
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Vinod Kumar Tengwar
The State Of Chhattisgarh
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
