Dismissed

Tuntun Pandit v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Feb 2018CR. APP (SJ)/25/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of a criminal appeal challenging the conviction and sentence for voluntary causing grievous hurt and criminal intimidation. The court held the original five-year sentence to be excessive.

What did the court decide?

The appeal dismissed. Sentence reduced to period already undergone; fine enhanced to Rs.5000/- with three months' simple imprisonment for default.

Tuntun Pandit Vs the State of Bihar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.25 of 2011

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Tuntun Pandit, Son of Hero Pandit, Resident of Village Sikandarpur, P.S. Deep Nagar, District Nalanda

¶4

... ... Appellant/s

¶5

The State of Bihar ===============	Versus ... ... Respondent/s =======================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant	: Mr. Binit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Raj Kishore Prasad, Advocate
For the State	: Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP
for the Informant ===============	: Mr. Satya Ranjan Sinha, Advocate Ms. Seems Kumari, Advocate =======================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-02-2018

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶8

This appeal is preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.11.2010 and 01.12.2010 respectively, passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Nalanda, Biharsharif in Sessions Trial No.475 of 2000, arising out of Deep Nagar P.S. Case No.87 of 1999, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo 5 years of RI and fine of Rs.2000/- and in case of becoming defaulter to further undergo 6 months of simple imprisonment and 1 month simple imprisonment under Section 341 IPC however, both the sentences shall run concurrently.

¶9

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.25 of 2011 dt.15-02-2018 2/4

¶10

In the said sessions trial, the present appellant Tuntun Pandit along with three co-accused, namely, Haro Pandit, Akaisa Pandit and Kusum Devi were put on trial and all were charged under Sections 307, 341 and 323/34 IPC and Tuntun Pandit was also charged under Sections 307 and 325 IPC and Kusum Devi and Akaisa Pandit also charged separately under Section 323 IPC. The trial court acquitted all the accused persons including the present appellant Tuntun Pandit for the offence under Section 307 IPC but Tuntun Pandit has been convicted under Section 325 IPC and Kusum Devi and Akaisa Pandit have been convicted under Sections 323 and and convicted under Sections 341/34 IPC but no substantive punishment was awarded to other accused rather after admonition they were released by the trial court giving benefit under Section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act.

¶11

The short fact giving rise to the case is that Haro Pandit and Tuntun Pandit were engaged in gambling in front of the shop of the informant, so objected then Haro Pandit started throwing the articles kept in his shop, entered into scuffle, in the meanwhile, Tuntun Pandit picked up a spade and gave one blow over the head of the informant. Daughter of the informant came to his rescue then Haro Pandit, Kusum Devi, wife of Haro Pandit assaulted her and police after completion of investigation submitted charge-

¶12

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.25 of 2011 dt.15-02-2018 3/4

¶13

sheet under Section 307 and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused persons and after taking cognizance case was committed to the court of sessions for trial and on its conclusion the present judgment was passed.

¶14

Altogether seven witnesses have been examined by the prosecution and some documents have been brought on record by proving as exhibits including fardbeyan of the informant (Ext.1), the endorsement of the SHO of Deep Nagar Police Station (Ext.1/2), FIR itself (Ext.2) and injury report (Ext.3 series). X-ray report was also marked Y for identification. At the very out set, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not assail the conviction part rather gives emphasis to modify the sentence on two counts. First, that both sides are co-villagers and no previous conviction has been proved against the appellant and much time has elapsed since the said occurrence. In course of trial, the prosecution has proved that the appellant had given a blow by the back of the spade on the head of the informant but there was no repetition. Only a single blow was given at the head besides another injury is found on the shoulder but the Dr. M. Dubey (PW7) found injury on the head grievous one as there was fracture of the frontal bone, so the charge under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code has been framed against the appellant. The trial court

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.25 of 2011 dt.15-02-2018 4/4

¶16

has sentenced five years of RI and Rs.2000/- fine however, the sentence appears excessive. The punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hut under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code is the imprisonment which may extend to seven years and fine, so the minimum period of imprisonment is not prescribed under the law. Moreover in the case at hand much time has elapsed after occurrence approximately more than 18 years and there is nothing on record to show that the appellant was earlier convicted in any other case, hence, his sentence is reduced to period already undergone and fine of Rs.5000/- and that is to be paid to the informant, in case of default in making payment of fine to further undergo sentence of three months of simple imprisonment.

¶17

With the aforesaid modification in sentence, the appeal stands dismissed.

¶18

(Arun Kumar, J)

¶19

S.KUMAR/-

¶20

AFR/NAFR	AFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	23.04.2018
Transmission Date	23.04.2018

Tuntun Pandit v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuntun Pandit v. the State of Bihar

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

Nasir Khan Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandra Giri @ Babu Bhaiya Vs The State Of Bihar

Jay Kishore Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Mikki Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Mantu Kumar @ Mantu Kumar Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Sumant Kumar @ Pappu Vs The State Of Bihar