HINDU SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE convict -petitioner (hereinafter called 'accused') through this revision petition challenges judgment dated 4.7.1989 delivered by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, confirming judgment dated 27.2.1988, delivered by Judicial Magistrate, First Class Dhar, convicting the accused under sections 326 and 323 IPC, and sentencing respectively to one year R.I. and fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default one month S.I. on the first count and one month R.I. on the second count; sentences to run consecutively.

(2.) PROSECUTION story is that on 1.10.1982, at village Umariya Darji Bujarj at 2 p.m. complainant Narayan (PW 1) with his son Shrikishan was working in their fields. Due to previous land dispute accused came to the place and dealt stick blows to Narayan, fell him down and bit to part of his nostrils, separating portion of the same from nose. On Shrikishan's intervening, accused dealt him a lathi below. FIR being lodged on the same day at 7.30 p.m., after usual investigation challan was put up against the accused.

(3.) THE contention of Shri Garg that Dr. R.C.Mandlik (P.W. 6) does not identify the injured Narayan as the person whom he had examined for the injuries is not acceptable. Narayan (P.W. 1) says that he had been sent to the hospital. Dr. Mandlik stated that he had examined Narayan S/o Ganpat and there was no cross -examination of the witness on the point. Besides, it was suggested to this witness that injury to Narayan could be caused by fan. Further no such contention was urged before the Sesions Judge. Considering all this accused cannot derive any benefit from the omission in the statement of Dr. Mandlik.