RAMSUSHIL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE judgment dated 23.8.2005 passed by the learned JMFC Amarpatan District Satna in Criminal Case No. 76/2003 the applicants were convicted for the offence under Sections 323/34 and 325/34 of IPC and sentenced with one month's RI and one year's RI with fine of Rs. 200/ -. In Criminal Appeal No. 177/2006 the learned Additional Sessions Judge Amarpatan vide judgment dated 6.1.2007 maintained the conviction for the offence under Section 323/34 and 325/34 of IPC but sentenced with a fine of Rs. 200/ - and six months' RI with fine of Rs. 200/ -. Being aggrieved with the judgments of both the Courts below, this criminal revision is preferred by the applicants. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 8.12.2002 at about 1:00 PM a quarrel was initiated between the applicant Rajmani and one Sabhapati father of the complainant Satyajit and Rajmani scuffled with Sabhapati. Thereafter Satyajit and his brother intervened in the matter to save his father, and then Ramsushil, Medni, Chhotelal, Anil Kumar and 3 -4 persons came with sticks and started assaulting the victims. Rajmani had assaulted by a stick on the mouth of the victim Satyajit, who sustained a severe injury on his lip. Various other persons were also injured. Ultimately, an FIR was lodged on 8.12.2002 which was recorded in a Rojnamcha. The victims Sabhapati and Satyajit were sent to the Civil Hospital, Ram Nagar. Dr. R.P. Garg (PW -5) had examined the victims. He gave his report Ex. P -2 and Ex. P -3 for the victims Sabhapati and Satyajit. He found two injuries to each of them, but for injury No. 2 of the victim Satyajit, he found that gums were tied but swollen. The blood was collected in the base of gums and two incisor teeth were found missing from the socket. Blood was oozing and therefore he found that the injury No. 2 caused to the victim Satyajit was grave. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the competent Court.

(2.) THE applicants -accused abjured their guilt. They did not take any specific plea. However, Ramadhar Dwivedi (DW -1) was examined.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.