SALAMUDDIN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Cr. P. C. against his conviction under Section 307 of IPC for three years R1 with fine of Rs. 500 in default for further six months RI passed by the Sessions Judge, Sehore in Sessions Trial No. 139/88, vide judgment dated 31. 7. 1990.

(2.) AS per case of the prosecution the victim Quess being servant of Ziyauddin, resident of village Takiya, went to gross field on 13. 7. 88 for grazing the cattle of his employer. At about 12 -12. 30 p. m. the victim was asked by the appellant not to graze the cattle for Nizamuddin instead he should work for him. Quess denied the same. On account of this altercation the appellant had given various blows of knife to him. Resultantly he received injuries on his chest, abdomen and back. On asking by Kutubuddin not to do such tiling then he was also subjected to abuse and criminal intimidation by appellant. Then Kutubuddin came to his residence and informed to his father Jiyauddin they went to the place of incident, at about 5 o'clock in the evening and brought to victim in village. Thereafter, the FIR was lodged at Police Station Doraha. The same was sent to police Station Ahmadpur as the incident took place in the territorial jurisdiction of such Police Station. On lodging the report the injured was sent to Primary Health Centre, Shyampur for examination and treatment, where his MLC was prepared and on advice the X-ray was taken in which some complications were found in his person. Then, he was shifted to Hamidiya Hospital, Bhopal for further treatment where he was operated after admission. On holding investigation the appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 307 of IPC.

(3.) ON committal, the sessions court has framed the charges against the appellant under Section 307 of IPC. The same was denied by him. In order to prove the case the prosecution has examined as many as sixteen witnesses while no-one has been examined on behalf of the appellant in his defence. On appreciation of evidence, the appellant was found guilty under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced as stated above, hence this appeal is preferred at the instance of the accused-appellant.