MUTKAI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under section 308 of IPC and sentenced for 3 years' rigorous imprisonment vide judgment dated 25.4.1997 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T.No.601/1995. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment, conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

(2.) PROSECUTION's case, in short, is that, on 21.12.1994, at about 2 a.m. in the night, the complainant Paramlal (P.W.2) was sleeping in his field. The complainant Paramlal and his wife Chaina Bai were irrigating the field by pumps. Suddenly, the complainant Paramlal found that someone was opening the nozzle of the pump and therefore, he went near the nozzle and he found that the appellant was removing the nozzle. Thereafter, when the appellant saw the complainant, he assaulted him by a Farsa for 2-3 times. On shouting of the complainant Paramlal, other witnesses Naresh and Mathura Prasad came to the spot. They saw the appellant, who was running from the spot. Chaina Bai went to the house of the landlord of the field Sevaram (P.W.4) and called him. Sevaram took the victim to his house and kept him up to the morning. In the morning, the complainant was taken to the Police Station Patan, where he lodged an FIR, Ex.P/3. He was directed to the Government Hospital, Patan for his medico legal examination and treatment. Dr.A.C.Chopra (P.W.1) examined the complainant Paramlal and gave a report, Ex.P/1. He found 3 incised wounds to him which were on head and right chick. Also some abrasions were found on right ear and right mustache (2 places). He opined that since the injury No.2 was found on the face of the complainant therefore, it was grievous. After due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the JMFC Patan, who committed the case to the Sessions Court and ultimately, it was transferred to the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur.

(3.) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge, after considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution, acquitted the appellant from the charges of offence punishable under section 307 of IPC but, convicted him for the offence punishable under section 308 of IPC and sentenced as mentioned above.