BABURAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, finding and sentence dated 13/07/2006 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Shahdol, in Criminal Appeal No. 205/2005, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 326 of I. P. C, and sentenced to R. I. for one year with fine of Rs. 500/ -.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that on 28. 06. 1996 at about 12 Noon complainant Jitendra Singh Rathore was going to call his brother-in-law Kamala Prasad Rathore. As soon as he reached near fencing boundary of the house of his brother-in-law the accused persons used filthy languages and this applicant inflicted Farsa blow on account of which he sustained injury. The complainant was medically examined. On the basis of medical report F. I. R. was written. Crime No. 120/1996 under Section 324 of I. P. C. was registered at Police Station Jaithari. His x-ray was also taken. Fracture was found in index, middle and ring finger of left hand. Therefore, the offence was converted under Section 326 of I. P. C. Spot map was prepared. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of Cr. P. C. After completing the usual investigation charge sheet was filed in the trial Court.

(3.) THE Trial Court framed the charge under Section 326 of I. P. C. The accused persons denied the guilt and claimed to be tried mainly contending that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. Prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses but the accused persons did not examine any witness in their defence. After appreciating the evidence trial Court acquitted other accused persons except this applicant who was found guilty under Section 326 of I. P. C. Being aggrieved by the judgment finding and sentence passed by the trial Court in Criminal Appeal No. 205/2005 was filed before the Sessions Court but same was dismissed with modification in sentence only. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment the instant revision has been preferred on the grounds mentioned in the memo of revision.