JAWAHARLAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The legality and propriety of the judgment of criminal appeal No 42/1997 passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa dated 14.7.1998 is under challenge in this revision whereby the learned Sessions Court has confirmed the finding of conviction and order of sentence recorded by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rewa against the present applicant in criminal case No.267/1996 whereby applicants Jawaharlal, Mahaveer and Rajendra vide judgment dated 14.2.1997 were found guilty of offence punishable under Section 147 and 324 read with 149 of IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and 6 months respectively for these offences alongwith fine of Rs.100/-. It has further been, directed that they will undergo rigorous imprisonment of 1 month -in default of payment of fine.

(2.) The short facts of the case as apparent from the judgment of the Trial Court are, that on 24.12.1998 in the evening about 5 p.m. when complainant Ramswaroop, Ravishankar and Budhesen were coming back to home, they were intercepted in the way by the present applicants and the other accused persons who have been released on probation of good conduct by the Trial Court. It is alleged that present applicants were armed with sticks and one Ramvati who has been acquitted by Appellate Court brought the axe and handed it over to applicant No.1 Jawahar for causing injury by that weapon to Ramswaroop. Thereafter present applicants also caused lathi blows to said Ramswaroop who sustained injuries. The matter was reported to the police and on the basis of FIR offence was registered. As per medical report of Dr.N.Narendranath Mishra, he sustained one incised wound, two abrasions and swelling. In the same incident Kamala also sustained 6-7 incised wounds. After investigation the chargesheet was filed against these applicants and other accused persons. They were tried by learned Magistrate, ultimately they were found guilty and have been convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he does not want to challenge the finding of guilty of the present applicants as recorded by the Trial Court and prayed that the matter be heard only on the quantum of sentence.