FAZAL HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF C G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 26.2.03 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh in Sessions Trial No. 129/2000. By way of the said judgment, the appellant has been convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years with fine of Rs. 500 with usual default stipulations. Case of the prosecution is the about 15 days earlier to 3.6.2000, Malti Bai (PW-1) and Chandra Yadav (PW-3), mother and father of victim Narayan, (a mentally unsound person) had taken him for treatment to the accused/appellant at village Jamgaon. For the said treatment, the accused/appellant had charged Rs. 2,000 and as a part of the treatment, the accused/appellant started whipping the victim and also used a chain lathi/danda for beating him. In continuation of the said treatment, again on 2.6.2000, the accused/appellant had assaulted the victim on various parts of his body due to which, on the same day victim Narayan succumbed to the blows given by the accused/appellant. On the very next date i.e. 3.6.2000, Malti Bai (PW-1), mother of deceased Narayan reported the matter to P.S. Chakradharnagr in respect of the sudden death of her mentally ill son. Subsequently, investigation was conducted and thereafter Crime No. 73/2000 was registered against the accused/appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Based on this, the accused/appellant was arrested on 4.6.2000 and at his instance, seizure of a bamboo stick and an iron chain was recovered.

(2.) Subsequently, charge sheet was prepared and the case was put for trial before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raigarh who in turn, committed the matter to the Sessions Court where the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 129/2000 before the court of Sessions Judge, Raigarh.

(3.) The trial court, after concluding the evidence and on considering the submissions put forth by the prosecution as well as from the defence, vide its judgment dated 26.2.03 found that no case against the accused/appellant under Section 302 IPC was made out and similarly neither did the evidence show that act on the part of the accused/appellant would fall under Section 304 Part I IPC and therefore, the trial court finally convicted the accused/appellant under Section 304 Part II IPC holding that the accused/appellant has done the act with the knowledge that the blows that he had given to deceased Narayan, were likely to have caused death but without any intention to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. Thus convicting the accused/appellant for the offence under Section 304 Part II IPC sentenced him mentioned above.