BRIJLAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this criminal appeal the challenge levied is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18-7-2001 passed by the Special Judge, Durg in Special Case No. 123/2000 whereby and whereunder he convicted the appellant for offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (in brevity 'IPC') and sentenced to undergo RI for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for 3 months.

(2.) In brief, case of the prosecution is that complainant Guharam was a resident of village Hirukhapri. On 30-3-1999 he was getting clean his courtyard through Netram God. At that time appellant and coaccused Dayaram reached there. They abused him, co-accused Dayaram beat him by hands and fists. Appellant caused injuries on his head by an axe and a club. On very day said complainant lodged FIR in police Station Ranchirai. After completing the investigation a charge sheet was filed against them. Trial Court framed charges against them under Section 294/34, 307/34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in brevity 'SCST Act'). After conclusion of the trial, Trial Court acquitted appellant and co-accused Dayaram of the charges punishable under Section 294/34, IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of the SCST Act, coaccused of the charge punishable under Section 307/34, IPC, however, convicted appellant for offence punishable under section 324, IPC instead of Section 307, IPC.

(3.) Shri Vikas Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant strenuously argued that trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in its proper perspective. Thus, aforesaid conviction and sentence are bad in the eyes of law and not sustainable. Thus, aforesaid conviction and sentence may be set aside and the appellant may be acquitted of the aforesaid charge.