DAYAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment dated 23.12.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chachoda, District Guna, dismissing Criminal Appeal No.166/2016 and confirming the judgment of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chachoda, dated 21.3.2016 passed in Criminal Case No.807/2012, convicting the applicant for an offence under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that on 24.10.2012 at about 4.00 pm, complainant Savat Singh was returning home after grazing his cattle along with the cattle of Dayal and Harisingh, which were being driven away by Sumer Gurjar. When he reached near Kirwada, Dayal Singh and Harisingh met him and started abusing. On his resist, accused Dayal has caused a lathi blow resulting injury on left hand dorsum and swelling thereon. On this oral report, Police Station Chachoda registered merg No.274/2012 and sent the injured for medical examination. On x-ray examination, a fracture on left hand dorsum was found, therefore an offence punishable under Sections 325, 323, 504, 34 of IPC was registered at Crime No.524/2012. After completion of the investigation, the Police filed the charge sheet before the Court of JMFC, Chachoda. After framing of charges and recording of evidence, the offence was found proved and the applicant was convicted as stated herein above. An appeal was preferred against that order, which was dismissed. Hence, this revision petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued at length and submitted that the applicant has been convicted erroeously while he has not committed any offence and the Courts below committed error in not properly appreciating the evidence, correctness of the finding, therefore, the impugned judgments are liable to be set aside in the revision. In alternative, learned counsel submitted that the applicant has no previous antecedents and he will maintain a good behaviour in future. There was no previous enmity between the parties. The applicant has already served approximately 15 days jail sentence. Therefore, it was prayed that the sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by the applicant and the amount of fine may be reasonably enhanced.