MOHIT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeals assail the judgment and order dated 15/05/2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Sessions Case No. 129 of 2007, whereby, the learned trial Judge was pleased to acquit the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC'), however, convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304(II) of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and a half years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further simple imprisonment for 10 days. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. However, for the offence punishable under Section 504, no separate punishment was imposed. For the offence punishable under Section135 of the Bombay Police Act, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 100/ -. All the sentences were to run concurrently. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 1180 of 2012 has been filed by the accused against conviction, whereas, Criminal Appeal Nos. 1420 of 2012 and 1424 of 2012 have been filed by the State for enhancement of sentence and against acquittal for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, respectively.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the prosecution case are that on 13/08/2007 at about 10:30 hours, at the corner of street No. 11/1 in Lati Plot at Rajkot near the house of complainant - Dilip Chhaganbhai Makwana, the accused started quarreling with the complainant and his father keeping in mind the earlier dispute between them and assaulted the complainant with a wooden log and caused fracture on his right leg knee. He also assaulted the father of the complainant with wooden log on his head, who, ultimately succumbed to the injuries after 13 days. Thus, the accused alleged to have committed the offence for which, a complaint came to be lodged against him for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 325, 323, 504, 188 of the IPC.

(3.) THE contention of the learned advocate for the accused that after 13 days of the incident in question had occurred, the deceased had died and it was due to medical negligence, in our opinion, is required to be viewed very seriously and accordingly, the appeal against acquittal for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC cannot be entertained, more so when, the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC do not proved beyond reasonable doubt.