MOHANLAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal under section 374 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 29.3.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Special Sessions Trial No. 281/2003 whereby the learned trial Court has found the present appellant guilty under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to 4 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further ordered to suffer imprisonment for six months.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that at about 11:00 a.m. on 25.8.2003 at village Berchha, present appellant Mohanlal together with other seven co-accused persons came to the field of complainant and started quarrelling with them. All the accused persons caused various injuries to the complainant party. Present appellant-accused Mohanlal has fired by a gun by which the complainant party sustained injuries by the pellets. The matter has been reported by the complainant at Police Station, Nagda on which basis Police has registered a case under sections 147, 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, as complainant party belong to Scheduled Caste. Injured persons were sent for medical examination at Civil Hospital at Nagda. During the investigation, concerned Police has prepared the spot map, also seized the pellets from the hospital, arrested the accused persons and after due investigation filed the charge-sheet before the trial Court. All the accused persons abjured their guilt and their defence is of false implication in the case by the complainant party. Learned trial Court, after due appreciation of the prosecution evidence, acquitted seven co-accused persons from the various charges levelled against them and only held the present appellant- accused Mohanlal guilty under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as stated hereinabove. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that learned trial Court has committed error in holding the appellant-accused guilty under sectionm 307 of the Indian Penal Code whereas no substantial evidence is available on record against the present appellant. All the prosecution witnesses turned hostile and not stated anything against the present appellant also and on the basis of this statement, remaining seven co-accused persons have been acquitted by the trial Court itself. Gun has been fired by the present appellant is also not proved by the prosecution evidence on record, therefore, prayed for setting aside of the impugned judgment and for acquittal of the appellant-accused.