GEORGE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry, in C.C.No.370/2004, dated 23.05.2007, convicted the accused for the offence under Sections 326 and 506(ii) I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo three months' simple imprisonment on each count and the sentence shall run concurrently and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- on each count, in default in payment to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment, against which, the accused was preferred an appeal in C.A.No.14/2007, dated 07.10.2009, on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Puducherry, modified the conviction for the offence under Sections 324 and 506(ii) I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 45 days on each count and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- on each count, in default in payment to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment, against which, the accused preferred this revision.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is as follows:

(3.) CHALLENGING the conviction and sentence passed by both the Courts below, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused submitted that scene of occurrence has not been proved. There are two different versions given by P.W.1/injured, one in F.I.R. and another in his evidence. There was a delay in preferring the complaint. Dr.Anbukani, who treated P.W.1, was not examined and no reason has been assigned that why that doctor was not examined. P.W.2, who is none other than the brother of the injured, is not an eye witness. Hence, there is no evidence to convict the accused for the offence under Section 324 I.P.C. Hence he prayed for the acquittal of the accused.