MANOHAR DASS Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant revision is for impugning the judgment dated 21-3-01 passed by Sessions Judge, Guna in Criminal Appeal No. 8/01, whereby the learned judge has affirmed the conviction of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 326/149, 325/149 and 323/149 passed by Additional chief Judicial Magistrate, Axon Camp Guna, in Criminal Case No. 398/99 vide judgment dated 27-12-00. Vide the aforesaid judgment dated 27-12-00, the learned Magistrate had imposed rigorous imprisonment for 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 326/149 of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 325/149 of IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 6 months under Section 323/149 with fine of Rs. 2,000/-, 1,000/- and 500/- respectively to each of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. While modifying the sentence vide impugned judgment, the learned Judge imposed the jail sentence to the extent already undergone by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, i. e. , for a period of 11 days and extended the fine sentence of Rs. 500/- in total and in place of total amount of fine of Rs. 3,500/-, Rs. 4,000/- has been imposed on each of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) SHRI Sharma, the learned Counsel for the petitioner/complainant has drawn attention on the statements of Dr. K. K. Shrivastava (P. W. 1), Dr. Seetaram Raghuwanshi (P. W. 12) and has submitted that injured Mohandas sustained six injuries, injured Manohardas sustained 14 injuries and injured balramdas sustained 6 injuries. Out of these injuries, fracture was detected in left ulna of Balramdas, right radius and third rib of Manohardas. Thus, total 26 injuries were inflicted by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 out of which 3 injuries were grievous in nature. In view of this, the jail sentence is very meagure and reserves to be enhanced. He has further submitted that the revision is maintainable in view of the fact that under Section 397 of Cr. PC correctness of the sentence can also be looked into by this Court In support he has drawn attention on. ajudgment of the Apex Court in Pratap Vs. State of U. P. , AIR 1973 sc786.

(3.) SHRI Bhardwaj, learned Counsel for the State has submitted that state has not preferred any appeal in this case for enhancement of the sentence.