GIRDHARI SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision is directed against the judgment dated 27.12.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Dhamtari in Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2008 arising out of the judgment dated 14.7.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari in Criminal Case No.104 of 2008 convicting and sentencing each of the Applicants/accused as under:

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.3.2006, a dispute took place between Vishnu Gond and son of Gopal Tiwari. When Complainant Vichitra Veer alias Munna (PW1) tried to intervene, allegedly, all the Applicants/accused abused him and assaulted him with lathi and rod. The Complainant sustained grievous injuries. First Information Report (Ex.P1) was lodged by the Complainant. He was medically examined by Dr. R.H. Mishra (PW11) on 15.3.2006. His report is Ex.P12 in which he found total 6 injuries. Injuries No.2 and 5 were serious in nature and other injuries were simple in nature. During investigation, one danda was seized from Applicant Krishna Sahu vide Ex.P3. One iron rod was seized from Applicant Girvar Sahu vide Ex.P4. One more iron rod was seized from Applicant Girdhari Sahu vide Ex.P5. The seized articles were also examined by Dr. R.H. Mishra (PW11). His reports are Ex.P14 and P15 in which he opined that the injuries suffered by the Complainant could be caused by the said rods and danda. He also opined that injuries No.1 and 2, which were present on the head, could be dangerous to life. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Applicants/accused for offence punishable under Sections 326, 294, 506B, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The Trial Court framed charges against the Applicants/accused under Sections 294, 326/34 and 506 Part II of the IPC. After trial, the Trial Court acquitted the Applicants of the charges under Sections 294 and 506 Part II of the IPC, but convicted and sentenced them under Section 326 of the IPC, which has been affirmed by the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 27.12.2008.