KALLU Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Section 397 / 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order passed by Shri Sant Lal Ram, H.J.S., the then Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC and ST Act, Barabanki in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 1999 : Kallu and two Ors. v. State of U.P. whereby the appeal preferred against the judgment and order dated 29.5.1999 passed by Shri S.C. Sharma, P.C.S.(J), A.C.J.M., Barabanki in Criminal Case No. 917 of 1997 (Crime No. 17 of 1997) : State v. Kallu convicting and sentencing the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 323 / 34 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, for the offence punishable under Section 324 / 34 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, for the offence punishable under Section 504 I.P.C. to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and for the offence punishable under Section 506 I.P.C. to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, was dismissed and the above conviction and sentence were confirmed.

(2.) Prosecution version as is revealing from the record is that on 2.5.1997, at about 5.00 p.m., Pancham, brother of the first informant Ramji, resident of Atrauli, which lies within the circle of police station Zaidpur, District Barabanki had gone on the fields for grazing the cattle. It is further stated that accused Kallu, Arju and Jagjeevan (revisionists herein) reached there having lathi and banka with them and started abusing Pancham. On an altercation, Laxmi Narain and others reached there. The accused persons started beating Pancham as a result of which he sustained injuries. This incident was also witnessed by Ram Sewak and Badlu who rescued Pancham from the accused persons. Thereafter, accused persons left the place of incident abusing and intimidating Pancham. A report of the said incident was lodged by Ramji, complainant at the police station and Pancham was got medically examined. The investigation of the case was taken up by Sub Inspector Shiv Sharan Singh Parihar who after investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 323 , 324 , 504 , 506 I.P.C. The accused were charged for the said offences by the learned trial court who pleaded not guilty to be charged and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution in order to prove its case, has examined seven witnesses in all out of whom P.W.-1 Ram Ji is the first informant. He is not an eye witness to the incident. P.W.-2 Pancham is the injured witness itself. P.W.-3 Badlu, P.W.-4 Ram Sewak are the alleged independent eye witness of the incident. P.W.-5 Constable Madan Singh is a formal witness. P.W.-6 V.K. Sharma had medically examined Pancham after the incident. He has deposed on the factum of injury sustained by Pancham during the incident. P.W.-7 Sub Inspector Shiv Sharan Singh Parihar is the investigating Officer who after completing investigation, submitted chargesheet against the accused persons and he has deposed on the factum of investigation. No other witness was testified by the prosecution to prove its case. The accused persons in their statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution allegations and stated that they have been falsely involved in the case. The learned Magistrate after going through the evidence on record, reached to the conclusion that the charge stand proved against accused persons and he accordingly convicted the accused persons. Feeling aggrieved with the said judgment, an appeal was preferred by the accused persons which was also dismissed and judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned court below was confirmed. Feeling aggrieved with the said judgment and orders passed by the courts below, the accused have preferred this revision.