(1.) This revision application is preferred by original accused. The applicant was convicted for offences punishable under Sec. 323, 325, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days. The substantive sentence was directed to run concurrently. He challenged the order of conviction and sentence by preferring an appeal. The appellate Court held that the order of conviction required modification. So, instead of conviction for offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, he was convicted under Sec. 324 of the I.P.C. and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default, rigorous imprisonment for 15 days.
(2.) The incident giving rise to the prosecution took place on June 2nd, 1999. The informant had gone to obtain possession of a plot out of Gut No.92 alongwith village panchayat Officer. The applicant picked up a quarrel with him. The applicant pushed informant to ground, pounced on him and took bite of his left shoulder and also that of right little finger. The informant was seriously injured. His right little finger was fractured. He went to Anturli. The Medical Officer examined him and referred him for further X-ray examination as well for treatment. Consequent upon investigation carried out by the Police, the applicant was charge-sheetd for offences punishable under Sections 323, 326, 506 and 504 of the I.P.C.
(3.) On behalf of the applicant/petitioner, learned Advocate Mr.P.B.Pawar holding for Mr.Brahme S.P., would submit that the impugned order is unsustainable and perverse. He contended that teeth cannot be regarded as dangerous weapon. He would submit that offence under Sec. 324 of the I.P.C. is not met out. He contended that both the Courts below failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record and rendered perverse findings.