DHARMENDRA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A.No.2768/2020, an application for suspension of jail sentence of appellant - Dharmendra @ Dhanbahadur. The appellant has been convicted under the provision of Sections 307, 324 (2 counts) of IPC and under Section 25 (1-b)(b) of Arms Act vide judgment dated 28.12.2016 passed in S.T.No.35/14. After conviction, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.10,000/- for committing the offence under Section 307 of IPC and was further sentenced to 2 years RI with fine of Rs.1000/- in respect of each of the count under Section 324 of IPC and was also sentenced to undergo 1 year RI and Rs.1000/- fine in respect of charge under Section 25 (1-b)(b) of Arms Act .

(2.) As per prosecution story, the appellant had caused life threatening injury to Onkar Singh with 'Falia'. He has also injured Moolchand and Ishwar. As per the prosecution Onkar Singh received such grievous injuries on his head that he became unable to walk and talk and died after a year. Looking to this aspect, life imprisonment has been imposed as sentenced by the trial court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the Court's attention to the fact that doctor B.S. Dabar (PW8) has not stated that injuries on the person of Onkar Singh were such grievous that he was rendered unable to walk and speak. This witness, vide his report at ... 2 ... CRA.No.247/2017 Exhibit P/10 has found fracture on left frontal bone of Onakar Singh. However, apart from the fracture there is no further report as to whether the injury was dangerous to life or that because of the injury on the head, the victim, ie., Onkar Singh has lost his cognitive faculties. Learned counsel also submits that relatives of Onkar Singh injured, Ishwar (PW1) has stated not a word about injury caused to Onkar Singh and only when he declared hostile, that he supports prosecution story with regard to Onkar Singh. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is in jail for more than six years and deserves to be given the benefit under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.