RAJA RAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellants against the judgment and order dated 25.4.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court -II, Pratapgarh, in Sessions Trial No.105 of 2003, convicting each appellants with three years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 308 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. along with a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine, further additional six months imprisonment. The appellants have also been convicted under Section 332 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C., with imprisonment of two years and with a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine, with further imprisonment of three months each. The appellants have also been sentenced under Section 353 IPC for imprisonment of one year each with fine of Rs.500 and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment of three months each. In S.T. No.106/2003, the appellants have also been sentenced to undergo six months R.I., under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC. The Court has also directed that the sentence awarded in both the sessions trial, shall run concurrently. In both the sessions trial, the appellants have been acquitted of the charges under Section 307/34 IPC.

(2.) The complainant Suresh Narain Pandey has also preferred a revision against the impugned judgment and order by which learned lower court convicted the appellants, and the appeal has been preferred. By instant revision, the revisionist has prayed that the punishment awarded to the appellants be enhanced as the case is made out under Section 307/34 I.P.C. and not under Section 308 I.P.C. as held by lower court. The revisionist has also prayed that the appellants be also punished under Section 325 I.P.C. in S.T. No.106 of 2003 instead of Section 323/34 I.P.C as they inflicted injury by causing fracture. Since both the appeals and revision arose out of single judgment and order dated 25.4.206, these are being taken up for decision simultaneously by a single judgment. A copy of the order passed be placed in the accompanied revision.

(3.) The police has submitted charge sheet in both the Crime Nos.211 of 2000 and 212 of 2000 respectively and the Magistrate after taking cognizance committed both these cases for trial before the court of sessions and after trial, the cases have been numbered as S.T. No.105 of 2003 relating to Crime No.2011 of 2000 and another case has been numbered as S.T. No.106 of 2003 relating to Crime No.212 of 2000. These cases were tried by the court simultaneously and decided by single judgment and order against which the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants and revision has been preferred by the complainant for enhancement the sentence.